Forum menu
They are just grumpy that sks has got some good policies.
Eh?
With this and PR on the horizon it could just work.
Proportional representation? Starmer has ruled it out although Conference voted in favour
Edit: PR would need Labour in government to be implemented. If you meant PR as a vote winner that is far from certain, it was rejected 2 to 1 in a referendum. Although the unpopularity of the LibDems at the time probably played a significant part.
Good interview with Angela Rayner on the news agents podcast recently too
Angela Rayner is good as she can speak on her feet without anything prepared. I have seen her speak publicly twice now and was pretty impressed both times. She is fluid and knows how to crank up emotions in her audience. Obviously I have only seen her speak in fairly friendly environments.
Timed his run nicely. Looks a sure fire thing. It is reminiscent of the last time Labour got in.
Angela Rayner as no1
And keir as deputy HS
Labour would be running the show by now.
He did ok today.
I think the 1/2 of Starmer and Rayner works pretty well now. Like it or not a lot of people are turned right off by Rayner- I really like her but Starmer's maleness, boringness and shapeshifting has the advantage of being inoffensive, while she can be the firebrand and attract people who want that.
They are just grumpy that sks has got some good policies.
By any measure I’ve been one of the most vocal critics of Starmer, so this is a bit of an odd comment given my earlier post. I still don’t like the guy, but all I really care about is the policies and getting rid of the tories. For the first time in his leadership he looks like he offers both of those, and he’s doing what he said he would do in his leadership campaign which is uniting the party behind some radical transformational policies. Its just a pity he didn’t do it from the start.
If you meant PR as a vote winner that is far from certain, it was rejected 2 to 1 in a referendum.
When was that?
Or are you talking about AV which was a far weaker proposition that nobody wanted?
. If you meant PR as a vote winner that is far from certain, it was rejected 2 to 1 in a referendum.
Not only was it not a proper pr system but the majority of politicians in luding labour campaigned aganst it.
We see different pr systems working in Scotland.
Its just a pity he didn’t do it from the start.
Maybe wishful, but perhaps somewhere between Art of War and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope-a-dope; bide your time and wait until they've reached the truly indefensible, THEN counter.
Its just a pity he didn’t do it from the start.
Maybe just playing the long game, clearing out the saboteurs in the PLP so this moment didn't get sabotaged. Would it have made any difference if he had done this earlier, theres been no election. His timing has been bang on, really highlighted the idiocy of the Kwartang / Truss leadership, hes helped to discredit Truss from day one (although she and Kwartang have done most of the work). If he can now keep pressure on he should be able to ride it to the next election and maybe cause another leadership battle in the Tories in the meantime.
As for radical policies, I don't think much of what he announced was very radical, just sensible and in sharp contrast with the Tory madness. I really dislike government owned businesses and even I'm on-board with a state owned energy generator based on green technology.
The country is a mess and being hammered by outside forces, now is not the time for radical experimental policies when it won't get Labour elected.
Quiet in here tonight
Petty.
Only because we might be busy and not sat on a 'puter all day. The only reason for me currently.
What the hell - you lot disappear in the difficult times and pop up when you hear an announcement that suits.
Sounds on the surface of it all good ideas but I need to be convinced any of this will be implemented. Self imposed budgetary constraints will make things very tricky.
These things can't be enacted unless Rachel Reeves speak the correct financial language. Although I did hear Starmer talk about 'borrowing' to invest which is rubbish from a technical explanation but it's better to admit that now.
You know all the chaos of the last few days could have been circumvented if the Tories has just said something about Q/E - irrespective of pointless tax cuts. The dollar being generally strong because they got to the internet rates quickly. The dollar will have its day though and you watch the Tories seize that.
It's funny I remember lots of folk dissing conference when it suited them but hey ho.
Some of us are honest enough to welcome stuff.
Next few days expect stupid comments about the IMF coming to rescue of country that has the power to issue it's own currency. And possible Tory u-turns.
This war is far from over. Although I've always said the Tories would eventually fatigue themselves into oblivion.
What's Truly sad is we could have had all of this and more in 2017 but Corbyn etc. Where just simply lagging. And the playing field is easy for Starmer.
If someone can direct me to the referendum we had on Proportional Representation that’d be great…
I do remember the utter horse 💩 referendum in AV mind you.
Also: Starmer is simply doing (in a way) what we've been asking for on here for a while and that is some big solutions.
I don't see how in principle that's a centrist 'win'. That's just adhering to the idea you need left solutions for right-wing problems.
I presume some of the Centrists here are at odds with nationalised element of GB Energy concept? Because you were.
(Lol GB energy is a terrible name being previously one of the early companies to go bust! )
Starmer very good on Radio4 this morning. They're trying very hard to make the headline story about Rupa Huq... but he set out Labour's stall very well despite that.
I don’t see how in principle that’s a centrist ‘win’.
Who said it was?
Rone... why join in the over simplification of this debate as "dastardly centrists against the left"? Labour are offering policies that are in stark relief to the those of the Tories, and are carefully choosing, framing, and timing left wing (and green) policy announcements in a way that people who haven't been voting Labour (or Green) can get behind.
Maybe just playing the long game, clearing out the saboteurs in the PLP so this moment didn’t get sabotaged.
The reason for "saboteurs" as you call them was because he cynically bought the votes of the left (including mine) then set about removing them from the party. He brought that entirely on himself.
Anyway, lots to like in the speech yesterday but we'll have to wait and see if he actually means it this time.
Enjoy the small victories just now, no point having the them and us within the labour support, it's going to be a long two years until the next election, there'll be a lot of movement, both in personnel and in policies.
Anyway, lots to like in the speech yesterday.....
I didn't see the whole of the hour long speech but what I saw or know of it I found encouraging. What concerns me most isn't what Starmer said, which seems fine, but what he didn't say.
Among what he didn't mention, as I understand it, was any reference to high profile current industrial action and growing calls for industrial action across many sectors.
This will not have been an oversight, Starmer is the leader of a political party founded by trade unions and still bankrolled by trade unions.
Starmer has a responsibility to represent organised working people, especially ones currently engaged in dispute with Tory government imposed policies. Plenty of senior Labour politicians recognise this, in contrast Starmer wants to distance himself from such responsibility.
I no doubt that the announcements of rail nationalisation and Great British Energy is the result of pressure from trade unions, and it very much has to be welcomed imo, but there is still a long way to go.
On another issue I found the reaction to Starmer's speech frankly disturbing - the constant standing ovations throughout it and the stage managed sight of his adoring wife rushing to kiss him, followed by a walkabout shaking hands and waving, looked exactly like an American political rally and very little like a Labour Party Conference.
I'm not blaming Starmer personally for that but it's worrying just how much the Labour Party has changed in that respect.
Starmer was excellent on Today(in fact the whole last half of the program was good for a change with some properly interesting speakers on instead of just wheeling out John Redwood and some idiot from the Spectator yet again for some headbanging).
He didn't get sidetracked but at the same time answered the questions put, even the stupid insistance he come up with a figure for the 1p cut in IT. The points he got across were well made and he dealt with the Huq issue in short order by calling it out for what it was straight away.
Even managed to end on a funny, backed up with some passion.
Best speech I've heard him make yesterday and best interview I've heard from him today - perhaps things are looking up but as above, before we get anywhere near a Labour Govt we have to get through the current shitestorm. Its going to be a long and painful 2 years.
On another issue I found the reaction to Starmer’s speech frankly disturbing – the constant standing ovations throughout it and the stage managed sight of his adoring wife rushing to kiss him, followed by a walkabout shaking hands and waving, looked exactly like an American political rally and very little like a Labour Party Conference.
I don't care for it either but it's nothing new.
Was thinking about Labour and Starmer's current situation last night whilst suffering from insomnia again.
What they are really selling now is hope, pure and simple and there is a real appetite for that at the moment.
That appetite is likely to be ravenous 2 years from now.
https://www.gg2.net/keir-starmer-calls-rupa-huqs-comments-on-kwarteng-clearly-racist/
She will be dealt with and I’ll be absolutely clear – it was racist,”
So okay Kwarteng isn't superficially black, he is a proper black geezer, even if his upbringing, education, and political career choices, aren't very typical of a black Brit, but how can Rupa Huqs comment be described as "racist"?
Was Rupa Huq, who appears to be more than superficially brown, really showing prejudice towards Kwarteng because of his colour?
What it was undoubtedly, imo, was rude, and she has indeed apologised for the remark, but it was made in a fringe meeting in which she was presumably criticising the Chancellor, she wouldn't have known that a supporter of a right-wing Tory website was recording her comments.
For Starmer to jump in and publicly accuse the black woman of racism seems like a gross overreaction to me. Perhaps he should tackle real racism inside the Labour Party, instead of using the racist card whenever it suits him.
https://www.voice-online.co.uk/news/uk-news/2022/07/19/widespread-racism-in-labour-new-report/
Damning report finds Labour were "operating a hierarchy of racism". Black MPs abused in leaked messages tell The Voice the party must change.
Starmer was excellent on Today
He was pretty good on 5live this morning apart from when asked a bland question about football. Should Saka be starting upfront? Bland platitudes, and then asked who should be playing up front with him? The awkwardness as he couldn't name another England forward or just say he wasn't interested in football was impressive. It's 2:00:45 into this mornings breakfast show.
Ok wrnie ill take you up on it.
One definition of racism is " negative stereotyping based on race.
The stereotype here is that all black men speak with an accent. It was used in a pejorative way to denigrate him.
And yes black on bkack and brown on black racism exists.
Do i think Huq is racist? I doubt it. Was the remark racist? Obviously
Ask a black person you know if they think it racist.
One definition of racism is ” negative stereotyping based on race.
Huq's remark was clearly stereotyping, she was stereotyping the sort of person who goes to Eton, but I don't see how it was negative against black people, which it would have to be for it to be racist.
What the remark was was quite rude and impolite, it questioned his blackness. If I met Kwarteng and said to him "call yourself a black man?" he would quite rightly consider me to be rude. But it couldn't be classed as racist, just stupid.
Huq has apologised, the remark wasn't for public consumption, just like rude remarks about Truss and Kwarteng on stw aren't, I think accusing her of a racist remark and suspending her from the party is an over reaction which will greatly please Tory politicians.
And not least because the Labour Party appears to have serious issues of racism which Starmer has, allegedly by black members, failed to address. I'm not impressed with him going around publicly criticising a black female Labour MP to please the Tories and right-wing tabloids.
The sterotype is that all black men speak with obviously black accents.
She then used that sterotype to call him nott a real black man. Thats negative sterotyping based on race
I know other black men who speak with received pronunciation who are not posh boys
If she wanted to sterotype him based on eton there are othet characteristics she could have used
Ask a black friend
i didn't realise she had been suspended. Thats a gross over reaction and you are perfectly correct that there are bigger racism issues in labour
How much is the over reaction based on Huqs race?
Thats a gross over reaction
Maybe not, it's certainly a good demonstration that you don't get a free pass to abuse people of a similar colour in the Labour Party.
I’m not impressed with him
Really? You don't give that impression.
Maybe an over reaction but not at all unreasonable given the ammo the right wing press would have used if he hadn't. If the last few days have taught us anything about Starmer it's that he is determined to be seen as the sensible choice for the majority. Dealing quickly with Huq is route one.
Is apartheid racist?
chestrockwell - Full Member
I’m not impressed with himReally? You don’t give that impression.
The full sentence rather than just the first 5 words of it would have given my comment context chestrockweii. But assuming that you weren't trying to save on space I have no doubt that denying my comment of context was your intention.
The right-wing press will use the incident to attack the Labour Party if they wish, suspension from the Labour Party won't rob them of "ammo" imo, they will in fact relish it as it will expand the story and crank up more hostile reporting.
It was a daft comment but imo no more racist than people on this forum expressing disappointment in Priti Patel when she was Home Secretary for pursuing racist asylum rules despite herself being brown.
You could say that Priti Patel was "superficially" an Asian woman but in every other respect just another Tory like all other white racist Tories.
Would you class that as a racist comment because I assuming that Asian women should behave in a certain manner over certain issues? Is the comment racist because it stereotypes Asian women?
Your comment does not need context to anyone who has taken even a fleeting interest in this thread Ernie. You may well make some valid points but your seething resentment for Starmer clouds everything you say in this chat.
Yes of course that comment needed context. There is no "seething resentment" of Starmer on my part. I have repeatedly said that I do not believe that he is the problem which is why I consider that replacing him would be pointless.
I am more than happy to give Starmer credit when it is warranted. I happen to think that the 10 pledges that he made prior to becoming leader were absolutely excellent, and no one has done more to publicise them on here than me.
I expect the Labour Party to offer a credible and significant alternative to the Tories, when imo they do so they can expect my full and active support. But I will criticise them when they attempt to ape the Tories - I am strongly opposed to the Tories and their ruling class agenda - why would I expect Labour to emulate them?
Labour's recent committment to support common ownership in rail and energy is great but it is exactly what I expect from a left-wing social democratic party set up by working people for working people, it's nothing to get over excited and start writing home about - it's just bog standard alternative to free market neo-liberalism. I expect a lot more.
Starmer deserves credit when he gets it right but he also deserves criticism when he screws up or is responsible for divisive policies and expulsions etc.
Ironically imo it is your seething resentment for my left-wing views that results in you selectively picking and taking my comments out of context chestrockweii.
Righto mate, I'm off to bed.
Definitely racist. She should be sacked. I read on Twitter that she also went to a private school, if true she is a racist hypocrite.
How much is the over reaction based on Huqs race?
If she was white she would have been sacked already.
LAB: 380 (+178)
CON: 174 (-191)
Chuffin eck. And the shit hasn't really started hitting the fan yet.
Labour’s recent committment to support common ownership in rail and energy is great but it is exactly what I expect from a left-wing social democratic party set up by working people for working people, it’s nothing to get over excited and start writing home about – it’s just bog standard alternative to free market neo-liberalism. I expect a lot more.
You want a lot more, of course, as do I; but in the current climate you need to take what you can get. That's on offer and I'd be thrilled with it. And you can bet that if it did well, the drift left would continue.
I don't think the UK political landscape is ripe for dramatic shifts, so if you want a shift at all you'll have to support the small ones and hope they continue.
If she was white she would have been sacked already.
What do you mean sacked? She can't be sacked, she could be expelled from the Labour Party but that requires a proper disciplinary procedure with no more than suspension initially. The Labour needs to at least maintain some semblance of fairness and justice.
If she gets off lightly, apart from the fact that she hasn't done anything serious imo, it is unlikely to be because she has brown skin and far more likely because she is on the right-wing of the Labour Party and is a Starmer supporter.
Plenty of left-wingers with brown skin have been expelled from the Labour Party - one, Marc Wadsworth, a high profile expulsion, I know personally as he drinks in my trade union club.
Edited for correct link:
https://twitter.com/rupahuq/status/1215585018770264064
Yes expelled- get her gone. Horrible racist comment and stupid aswell.
If there was ever a thread where brevity would be appreciated...
TL:DR should be deployed frequently to help avoid turgidity.
She’s a good MP. I suspect the fact she apologised so quickly and unreservedly will be in her favour.
so if you want a shift at all you’ll have to support the small ones and hope they continue.
I keep banging on how the UK needs a social democratic alternative to the Tories's neo-liberalism, I don't consider myself to be a social democrat, I am way more left-wing than that.
A couple of posts back I said that the Labour Party is left-wing social democratic party set up by working people for working people, it was actually set up very much as a socialist party, but I accept that it no longer is and that under current conditions the best that can be hoped for is a commitment to social democracy.
So I fully understand the importance of realistic and pragmatic "small steps".
"If you hear him on the Today programme, you wouldn't know he's black."
There are plenty of things you could say to criticise kwarteng but none of them require mentioning his colour. She could have saved the ambiguity and just called him a coconut I suppose.
I keep banging on
Yes. Starmer did a pretty decent job of shutting this down imo. It was the only blot on an otherwise well reported conference.
Owen Jones who has plenty of previous for attacking Starmer seems to like what he heard at conference
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/28/keir-starmer-no-10-liz-truss-labour
Still probably the most negative coverage I’ve read so far… full of not so subtle barbed attacks. With friends like these…
[ I like him by the way, and he has to put up with so much vile hatred coming his way they I don’t like to say anything too negative about him… but he’s more reluctant to praise the handful of good policies coming out of the conference period then makes sense… just embrace them and say you hope there’s more to come… why try and make the story about internal battles that are, quite frankly, pretty much irrelevant yet simultaneously still hugely damaging when it comes to the public vote and getting the Tories out and left wing policies back on track in the UK? Look outward. Look forward. Help move the UK away from its currently highly damaging libertarian rightward path. ]