Has a single person suggested that is the case in this thread?
Well to read binners and many on here you'd think that's what it was. Binners has even managed to persuade himself that the Iraq war wasn't all that bad after all and was a minor blip in an otherwise unblemished record. I suppose I also need to remind everyone of cash for questions, Mandelson being sacked twice for helping his russian and indian billionaire friends, and the general reek of cronyism which was just as bad as the tories display now.
Binners has even managed to persuade himself that the Iraq war wasn’t all that bad after all and was a minor blip in an otherwise unblemished record
Thats an interesting twisting of what I said.
Actually... the word I used to describe the Iraq War was a 'disaster'. Which it was and still is. What I then said is that you can't judge 13 years of new labour through the prism of the Iraq war.
And I've certainly never defended Peter Mandleson
the popular myth that the Blair govt was a social democratic utopia
Has a single person suggested that is the case in this thread?
No. But he won three elections and it doesn't matter what your policies are if you can't enact them.
No its a statement about the flaws on the centrist project.
Centrist is such an empty word. We have a mixed economy... the rules the government set, and the money the government controls... determines who that works for. I don't want a "New Labour" government... I want a Labour one... but if Starmer gets pushed out (and be under no illusions this what people from Corbyn's wife downwards are openly calling for) there is no chance of "unity"... the Labour party will shed members, supporters and voters from the Left, and the next leader will have nothing to stop them writing off all the policies of 2017 & 2019 as a complete aberration, rather than a welcome shift away from the less committed policies of previous years. Many people who I agree with substantially on policy are currently destroying the influence that left leaning parts of the Labour movement have.. and for what?
Well to read binners and many on here you’d think that’s what it was.
Nope, I've not read a single post that suggests that, from anyone. People have suggested that having a Tory government then would have been worse, which I find hard to disagree with... based on what happened before and since.
Can we add PFI to Iraq? I'm not a fan of free schools nor the expansion of faith schools either.
Can we add PFI to Iraq?
And university tuition fees. The single largest negative impact on social mobility in a long time, and unbelievably executed by a labour government.
Agree with all those negatives.
Repeat x100 … Starmer is not the new Blair … his replacement might have to be more like Blair though … push him out and the party will split, and the more successful part will abandon everything from 2017 … with the runt happy in their purity and safe from ever having to put theories into practise.
Centrist is such an empty word.
Yes I agree but centrist/moderates is the one the right wing of the Labour party seems to like. Neither of which are accurate since "centrist" begs the question of centre of what (plus fails to handle the inevitable shifting of it if only one side goes for the idea) and "moderate" is clearly bollocks considering how ideologically extreme many are.
We have a mixed economy
ermm yes? Although this is one of those bits where the hard right have done well in always just shouting free market/capitalist instead.
but if Starmer gets pushed out (and be under no illusions this what people from Corbyn’s wife downwards are openly calling for)
Odd that considering his behaviour eh?
We had the centrists/moderates nutters spending years attacking Corbyn and anyone left of centre whilst still demanding that it should be a broad church and they should be able to launch their rabid attacks unhindered.
Starmer was elected as someone in the middle able to unite the two halves but so far he seems to be pandering solely to the right side and coming across as a Blair mk 2 but minus any charisma and with the severe handicap of "fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me".
He doesnt seem overly keen on party unity himself so should the left of the party just sit there and shrug?
Ultimately we need PR or something so we can represent the different views properly but sadly those morons in the libdems screwed that up for years to come.
Affordable housing disaster??
Average house price tripled under new labour
Brown and darlings green light for austerity measures??
Bombing foreigners
Religious nutter as leader
If it looks like a duck....
We had the centrists/moderates nutters spending years attacking Corbyn and anyone left of centre whilst still demanding that it should be a broad church and they should be able to launch their rabid attacks unhindered.
Many MPs that fit that vague and loaded description were pushed out of parliament into other roles (mayors etc) or out of the party completely (to non-political jobs or to sit as independents etc). That there was no ‘unity’ in recent years is incontrovertible … if many on the left seek vengeance for this, at the cost of no Labour rebuild towards the next general election… the negative impact will be on all of us.
Starmer was elected as someone in the middle able to unite the two halves but so far he seems to be pandering solely to the right side and coming across as a Blair mk 2
Sigh...
At the risk of repeating myself yet again... can you give us one single example of any policy changes that show him 'pandering to the right'?
All he's done is give Jeremy Corbyn a (thoroughly deserved) slapped wrist for his churlish failure to accept the findings of EHRC report in full. That's it!
He can't exactly let Grandad just carry on regardless after what he's done, can he? What message would that send out? Both about how seriously the party is taking the issue of AS and also about his leadership abilities?
At the risk of repeating myself yet again… can you give us one single example of any policy changes that show him ‘pandering to the right’?
It's a fair point: to provide the evidence you seek, Starmer would actually have to propose some policies.
He said when he took over as leader that he'd stick with Corbyns policy agenda and since then has changed not one single aspect of that policy agenda
So what exactly is your problem?
Many MPs that fit that vague and loaded description were pushed out of parliament into other roles (mayors etc) or out of the party completely (to non-political jobs or to sit as independents etc).
The original cabinet tried to cover all bases but they carried out a staged resignation en mass designed to cause the most damage.
Claiming they were pushed in most cases seems to be stretching the definition somewhat as opposed to them taking their ball home and refusing to play.
Even the minor efforts (reflecting other parties) to exert control were decried as Stalinist.
Remember they couldnt even get rid of Hoey, who makes most tories look a bit leftist, without her choosing to go.
That there was no ‘unity’ in recent years is incontrovertible … if many on the left seek vengeance for this
The question is why shouldnt they? What is being done to encourage them to remain and work as opposed to the demands to purge the unbelievers.
It seems to be reverting back to the demanding unquestioning support without actually providing some reasons to do so. Where are the ideas and policies to carry people along as opposed to the careful stacking of the party apparatus?
He said when he took over as leader that he’d stick with Corbyns policy agenda and since then has changed not one single aspect of that policy agenda
So what exactly is your problem?
You'll be happy to provide some examples then...
Off you pop and put a list together
I do like a list
1. Erm......
A list derived from a vacuum? Good one.
He hasn’t shifted policy. He will have to. Pretty obvious that without conferences it’ll have to wait. So what’s the anger about right now…? Which policies has he dumped? Or is it just about a person*, not the policies?
*and I don’t mean Starmer [ sorry, I’m stepping away now … ]
Binners: reliably living down to expectations.
From a Guardian interview last month:
During his campaign for the leadership, he sought support among the left by issuing “10 pledges”, signing up to much of the Corbynite prospectus. Starmer is now putting a lot of distance between himself and those pledges, using the coronavirus crisis as his alibi. “The slate has been wiped pretty clean for everyone,” he contends, arguing that the pandemic means that both Labour and the Tories “are going to have to fundamentally rethink what they want to offer the electorate in 2024”.
If that's not a clear admission that he will be ditching the Corbyn prospectus, I don't know what is.
So, no rethink? No change from a losing, pre-pandemic, pre-Brexit 2019 manifesto? That would be bonkers, no? [ leave it Kelvin, go and be useful somewhere else ]
He hasn’t shifted policy. He will have to.
And he's made it clear that he will, which makes Binners' assertion all the more odd.
TWITTER.COM So, no rethink? No change from a losing, pre-pandemic, pre-Brexit 2019 manifesto? That would he bonkers, no?
Absolutely: 2024 is not 2019. But as said upthread, there's a real risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
And he’s made it clear that he will, which makes Binners’ assertion all the more odd.
Tenses. Back to school for you…
there’s a real risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater
I agree.
Railways have been nationalised or at least their debts have.
Tenses. Back to school for you…
Binners claimed that Starmer would stick with Corbyn's policy agenda. Starmer is on record saying that he will ditch it. That he hasn't changed it yet is immaterial as there are no elections any time soon.
Many MPs that fit that vague and loaded description were pushed out of parliament into other roles (mayors etc)
That's an interesting spin, and mostly untrue. The likes of Burnham left because they didn't agree with Corbyn and thought it better to get out rather than stay in and snipe from the sidelines like most of their colleagues. I've a lot of respect for that even though I would have preferred him to stay and support the policy agenda. If only his right wing colleagues had done the same, labour could have gone into both the 2017 and 2019 elections with a united PLP all pulling in the same direction.
He said when he took over as leader that he’d stick with Corbyns policy agenda and since then has changed not one single aspect of that policy agenda
You were asked to cite examples of policy changes that have happened that have got you irate. All we have is the acknowledgment that the policy platform will change between 2019 and the next election. They may well, on balance, be policies that you and I prefer to 2019 (unlikely, but hey)... being angry about future unmade policy changes at this point is... well, I dunno what word to use...
labour could have gone into both the 2017 and 2019 elections with a united PLP all pulling in the same direction
But they didn't... so... seek revenge and keep circling around the past leader and his political ineptitude over the EHRC report... or work to create a policy platform to unite behind... pick now.
he contends, arguing that the pandemic means that both Labour and the Tories “are going to have to fundamentally rethink what they want to offer the electorate in 2024”.
Thats just a truism, surely?
I don't know if you noticed, but we're about to crash out of the EU, which on top of Covid is going to plunge the country into a recession that is going to make the 1980's look like a picnic.
This country is going to look like a very different place this time next year with mass unemployment and a trashed economy. To be referencing 2019 will be like referencing the 1950's it'll be so irrelevent.
I'd imagine (and certainly hope) that there will be clear water between Labour and the Tory policies at that point. Hyper-austerity from the Tory's, as that is all they know, and hopefully a more Keynesian programme of infrastructure investment from labour. Which even as I type it sounds very Corbynite
So I just don't understand why you're having a thromby and getting your petticoats all ruffled
You were asked to cite examples of policy changes that have happened that have got you irate.
The problem there, if you meant to quote me and not Binners, is that I'm not irate, angry, irked or disgruntled. Just unsure why an absence of new policy to date is presented as evidence of anything at all.
I quoted binners… because you were trying to put words in his mouth that he did not use.
EDIT: this is going nowhere... Starmer has deserted us on policy by not changing policy.... what's the point.
Thats just a truism, surely?
I don’t know if you noticed, but we’re about to crash out of the EU, which on top of Covid is going to plunge the country into a recession that is going to make the 1980’s look like a picnic.
This country is going to look like a very different place this time next year. I’d imagine that there will be clear water between Labour and the Tory policies at that point. Hyper-austerity from the Tory’s and a more Keynesian programme of investment from labour
You'll note that at no point have I argued that Starmer should stick with the 2019 platform, regardless of circumstances. What should be in the new platform is the matter of debate here, and Starmer's preferences are at the moment largely unknown.
I quoted binners… because you were trying to put words in his mouth that he did not use.
I don't believe I did: stop presenting opinion as fact.
So.. what has Starmer done wrong up to now (rather than possibly in the future)...? Extra points for not mentioning he who we're trying not to mention...
And whilst we've been talking Starmer enacts his latest blairite ruse to acquire dictatorial control of the party. Unity my arse!
So.. what has Starmer done wrong…? Extra points for not mentioning he who we’re trying not to mention…
I see it's groundhog day: scroll back to the first couple of pages and I was arguing that we would need to have some idea of Starmer's vision in order to pass judgement. That's still the case.
Today the entire left walked out of Labour’s NEC
What are the "entire Left" walking away from? Utterly depressing for those of us that want a proper left leaning government in our lifetime.
censored legitimate debate inside our Party
What has been censored?
I was arguing that we would need to have some idea of Starmer’s vision in order to pass judgement
I agree.
So what has Starmer done wrong up to now?
And then there's this, which neatly sums up the situation. If Starmer's aim was to replace Blair as the most unpopular leader among the membership then he seems to be succeeding. At least blair waited til he was PM before burning his bridges.
It appears that 'The left' just staged a 'walk out' of a zoom call
Brilliant!! 😀
A Zoom walkout... bet that was an impressive statement
Keir Starmer would suspend Corbyn
Ah, so that is what Starmer has done wrong. I think I've got it now.
drive every left winger out of shadow cabinet
Oh, and Long-Bailey. I'd forgotten about that.
Have you put yourself on mute?
I think he must have lost his connection....
Hang on a minute... I've just read on Twitter that he's apparently staged a walk out....
So what has Starmer done wrong up to now?
In terms of policy and vision he's done nothing right or wrong, because he's done nothing.
Managerially, he has mishandled the fallout from the ECHR report and is making a transparent power grab for the party machinery. From the posts above, the usual suspects here are content, but I'm pretty sure they were squealing when the boot was on the other foot.
