Forum menu
Did you know about it before someone else flagged it? Were you out of the blocks on this before anyone else?
I seriously doubt it. The tweet I saw from Starmer was already a day old when I first saw it.
I hadn’t heard of them, I don’t even remember the May story
Well, I had, and did... and as recently as last month I was reading about other connections with "gay conversion therapy" organisations inside the "current" administration. Naturally they mentioned what happened with May, and suggested current ministers and advisors could be falling into the same hole of looking homophobic due to their associations. They'll probably get a free pass now thanks to Starmer's mistake.
It is a largely selfish country full of horrible people and was tipped over the edge in the 80’s and will never go back
Load of bollox
Selfish people have always existed, as have those who are prepared to make their place nicer by getting off their arse and doing something about it
A fundamental question and the point or need for Labour is a lot less than it was 70 years ago. It is a very different time and people have very different priorities.
Seeing that was the post war Britain of the 1950's I'm not surprised. Britain in 2021 is a very different place
They’ll probably get a free pass now thanks to Starmer’s mistake.
I doubt it, the whole conversion thing harks back to a different era and we are no longer that country. It would be toxic for anyone to be associated with it
My personal view is that it’s all over for any left wing party in this country; there was never much appetite for it in the first place.
And yet people continue to support free healthcare, free education, universal benefits, progressive taxes, and publicly owned or not for profit management of strategic infrastructure and services. On the whole people will always support what is in their own best interests. What reactionary forces have learnt over the centuries is how to fool people into doing the opposite, and that has reached it's peak today with the help of globalisation, the internet and social media. A smart leftwing party would figure out how to use these same lessons to forward their own agenda, but instead all we get is pale imitation because the people at the top of the labour party have little to gain from a popular left wing agenda that the people at large would benefit from.
I really doubt he has the time to do that sort of due diligence, He’s got plenty of other things to worry about which is why he has his team should have vetted them. Labour make Starmer do all sorts of things for a plethora of religious groups from all religions Starmer has better things to do than vet them all.
It's his job to show leadership, ergo, it's his responsibility to ensure stuff like this doesn't happen. It has, which shows a clear failure of leadership. When Corbyn 'liked' a mural that was then interpreted as antisemitic, in spite of him apologising and admitting his error, that was then used ruthlessly as 'proof' he was antisemitic. The fact that very, very few people would have actually recognised the mural as containing antisemitic tropes (I didn't until it was pointed out, and I doubt 99.99% of the population did either) was irrelevant. But in Starmer's case, it was known that that church was dodgy. Boris was criticised for attending in 2009. And let's be honest, a lot of religious groups and institutions are fundamentally homophobic anyway. No; making excuses for Starmer is just papering over the cracks. He's useless. Labour are a busted flush. Time for change.
Time for change.
Vote Green
My personal view is that it’s all over for any left wing party in this country; there was never much appetite for it in the first place.
It is a largely selfish country full of horrible people and was tipped over the edge in the 80’s and will never go back
Whilst I don't think it's possible for this country to suddenly tip towards a radical leftist zeitgeist any time soon, you clearly haven't been around many young people. They're the future voters and decision makers. They won't be subscribing to the 'I'll alright Jack' mentality of many of their parents. Because they'll have to be implementing 'socialist' ideals, in order to survive and progress in life. In the same way that if you grew up in the 70s and 80s, you're probably a lot less racist and homophobic than your parents' generation, so the kids growing up today, could be a lot less tory. Here's hoping anyway.
Wonder if the 'unneeded' swathes of Labour membership will swing into action and close the anticipated gap at Hartlepool - with troops on the ground?
Oh.
Load of bollox
Selfish people have always existed, as have those who are prepared to make their place nicer by getting off their arse and doing something about it
I am talking about England, not sure which country you live in. The majority of people are only interested in their own needs and have a pretty horrible attitude to anyone less privileged.
The fact that the Tory party are in power pretty much most of the time totally backs this up.
swing into action and close the anticipated gap at Hartlepool
It can’t be closed down. That “gap” has come about because Johnson has now successfully fused the Conservative and Brexit/UKIP vote. Labour are polling slightly ahead of last election results in this seat, but it’s back to being a two horse rather than three horse race there (as it will be elsewhere come a general election). There’s the noise of a few percentages going to the NIPS joke party that doesn’t help, but ultimately this is about the Blukip project turning support/votes into seats. This is very dangerous for Labour in lots of strongly Vote Leave seats.
And yet people continue to support free healthcare, free education, universal benefits, progressive taxes, and publicly owned or not for profit management of strategic infrastructure and services.
They believe in them when they need them, not when they need to pay for them. And they certainly don't want to be paying for them for someone else.
Whilst I don’t think it’s possible for this country to suddenly tip towards a radical leftist zeitgeist any time soon, you clearly haven’t been around many young people. They’re the future voters and decision makers. They won’t be subscribing to the ‘I’ll alright Jack’ mentality of many of their parents. Because they’ll have to be implementing ‘socialist’ ideals, in order to survive and progress in life. In the same way that if you grew up in the 70s and 80s, you’re probably a lot less racist and homophobic than your parents’ generation, so the kids growing up today, could be a lot less tory. Here’s hoping anyway.
I know lots of young people and I totally agree that they are generally fair minded and hold views for a more equitable world.
BUT so did my friends, family and colleagues when we were young and mostly they have now migrated to the right.
My wife and I are both nurses and many of our colleagues have voted Tory for the past few elections.
FFS.
I do hope you're both right BTW.
I am talking about England, not sure which country you live in. The majority of people are only interested in their own needs and have a pretty horrible attitude to anyone less privileged.
The fact that the Tory party are in power pretty much most of the time totally backs this up.
I assume you live in Scotland then to come out with that bollox
Plenty of people care and get off their arses to make where they live a better place, litter pickers, food bank volunteers, charity shop staff, volunteers for this, that or the other, fund raisers for a plethora of good causes. Self entitled people with a streak of selfishness a mile wide are plentiful as anywhere but there are plenty of people who do care some of them vote for the Tories
I assume you live in Scotland then to come out with that bollox
Nope, lived in England for 53 years. Yes, clearly some people do care but on the whole they just don't.
How do you explain continual Tory governments getting voted in? Do you really think people that care about people who need the most help vote Tory?
What if… a sizeable minority (or even a majority) do care… but the Tories have hit on a winning successful formula for getting a different sizeable minority to get out and vote for them (not just say they are inclined not to). A working majority of seats (and unfettered rule) doesn’t even require a majority of votes, never mind the support of a majority of potential voters.
Dazh,
One of the reasons it is so difficult for a left wing party in the UK is the quality of the left wing candidates. Comparing Jeremy Corbyn to Bernie Sanders and Rebecca Wrong Daily to AOC isn't comparing apples and oranges it's chalk and cheese.
I don't think the population is any worse or more selfish than it was in previous generations, Its just the way things have been (miss) sold to them. I agree with many on here that England is essentially a conservative country with a small 'c' but if the right person comes along at the right moment and has the ability to sell it to 'em then I could easily see a swing towards more progressive politics.
Corbyn and Co. We're rubbish and did more damage to progressive politics than good. The new progressive hopefuls need to find another way of selling their message to the public that doesn't look like a re-tread of Michael Foot.
And forget about class definitions, many of the working class have shown recently that Nationalism trumps class solidarity anyway.
How about if we arranged it for you to have Nicola Sturgeon on a free transfer?
Corbyn and Co. We’re rubbish and did more damage to progressive politics than good.
This is just utter blinkered revisionist crap. Corbyn managed to get more people engaged with politics than ever before. Labour had the largest membership of any political party in Europe, under Corbyn. The impact Corbynism had on young people, was unprecedented in the UK. That we are now talking about the inequality in society due to the actions of wealthy powerful elites, isn't down to Ed Milliband, Gordon Brown and definitely not Tony Blair. It's down to Corbyn. He changed the conversation, and created genuine fear amongst the elites, so much so they spent many millions on bringing him down. He may have not wanted to become Labour leader, but the paucity of left wing figures, genuine opposition to right wing politics, is not his fault. That blame lies squarely at the feet of the neoliberals. And I don't know what your idea of 'progressive' is, but it definitely aint more of the same neoliberal shit Starmer seems intent on serving up. Blaming Corbyn is precisely what the right wants; keep the proles arguing amongst themselves, and distracted from what's really going on. It's time to change that stuck record, and look at what is actually progressive, and concentrate on that. And that has to be done without any help from the Labour leadership, because that's a rudderless ship. Labour need everyone from the 'far left' to the moderate right, if they are to stand any chance of challenging the tories. So far, all Starmer has done is alienate everyone who isn't part of his metropolitan elite cabal. Well done Sir Keith. That's going really well.
Nope, lived in England for 53 years. Yes, clearly some people do care but on the whole they just don’t.
How do you explain continual Tory governments getting voted in? Do you really think people that care about people who need the most help vote Tory?
You make the mistake of correlating a vote for the conservatives as somehow being uncaring.
I live in an area that has returned a conservative MP in my lifetime except when Blair was around, it's a Northern Mill town area with chronic deprivation, health inequalities etc. It has a labour local council, conservative county council and one of the conservative councillors was a former postman who raised £100,000's for local charities.
Tarring everyone with the "uncaring" trope for electing conservatives completely missed the complexity of a area which is changing rapidly and has more volunteer groups than you can shake a stick at. It also misses the complexity of the issues and how people think they should be fixed
An afterthought is perhaps the reason the conservatives do so well is that they don't go around insulting large numbers of the electorate, the left love to "other" anyone who don't agree with them, but how do you persuade them to vote for you if you treat them like that, and how do you get into power if people don't vote for you? Hence why despite having policies people might like, voters can't put an X in the box for a party that labels them as uncaring racist xenophobes
The evidence that Corbyn did more harm than good lies in mess he left the Labour Party in. If you noticed, I wasnt ctiticising progressive polocy, au contraire, I want to see progressive policies but recognise that if you tether those ideas to a donkey you're going nowhere.
You might also notice that I'm not suggesting Starmer is the answer either, all I'm asking for is someone with a bit of guile and a bit of wit.
And whilst Corbyn did manage to mobilise the youth somewhat, don't you think more recent events around social justice and Brexit would have mobilised the youth anyhow? Witness last summer's events where the youth mobilised and engaged all by themselves without instruction from Saint Jeremy. I don't think Jeremy Corbyn means anything to the youth anymore, they aren't looking to left wing Labour figures for guidance, they're looking for new voices.
Time for change.
2% of the voters of Hartlepool appear to agree with you
"Labour need everyone from the ‘far left’ to the moderate right, if they are to stand any chance of challenging the tories"
Correction, Labour need Anyone. Before you've even started campaigning you've discarded half the nation by limiting your outreach to those you deem 'acceptable' (echoing big n daft's point)
The Tories won (like they did with Thatcher) by engaging with all potential voters. It's how they wooed 'Essex man' in the 80's and how they converted the Northern Labour heartlands this time. Its also how Blair won....3 times.
The best way to win an election is to never mention class ever again, See people as individuals and never, ever other them.
The Tories won (like they did with Thatcher) by engaging with all potential voters.
I’m not sure that is true at all. But they did try and engage with as many as possible. You can not be a party of one class if you want to govern. This is not the 1940s.
To echo what some have said… every Conservative voter I know is also a volunteer*, they are not uncaring, but they do have a blind spot for what the government could and should do for the people they give up their own time to help. Or, they just think that things will be even worse for most people if Labour were in power. I disagree, but their motives are not purely based in self interest.
[ * obviously, that does not mean all volunteers vote Conservative, or that all Conservative voters are volunteers, so don’t start any of that nonsense ]
The impact Corbynism had on young people, was unprecedented in the UK.
it's an interesting one. millions of young first time voters went for Labour in 2017 on the back of the referendum, and then stayed away in even greater numbers in 2019 after they released that the Labour leadership lived in laa-laa land,
Blaming Corbyn is precisely what the right wants; keep the proles arguing amongst themselves, and distracted from what’s really going on. It’s time to change that stuck record, and look at what is actually progressive, and concentrate on that.
I think what the right wants is for people to keep playing the game ie Westminster, FPTP with Labour people spending their lives chuntering on about strategy/leaders.
Because thanks to freemarket capitalism and the media, the game is rigged in favour of the right. Or whichever party is happy to hold power while agreeing to do nothing of significance with it.
The inspiration should be the first political movement to represent the average person - the Chartists. They promoted a series of simple ways to improve people's lives - that had the power to turn society on its head. A democratic revolution.
It invigorated and inspired people.
It was smart, reasonable and rational.
It was gobby and provocative and fun.
scotroutes
Full Member
How about if we arranged it for you to have Nicola Sturgeon on a free transfer?
Thanks, but can you IMAGINE the British Press?
Her looks, her dress sense etc....she'd be slaughtered.
Politics is an elitists game, and unless more working class people become politically engaged and involved, there will be no change to the status quo. So I’ll ask once again; what is Starmer doing to change anything?
Yeah I'm not sure more whitening class labour MPs is necessarily a good thing, look at the mess in Liverpool
And then there's len...
How about if we arranged it for you to have Nicola Sturgeon on a free transfer?
We already have plenty of rotten boroughs, I don't see adding to that as a positive
And then there’s len…
What? Len has personal links to the people involved in the dodgy property deals, corruption and witness intimidation in Liverpool? While also questionably throwing around tens of millions of pounds of other people’s money?
Well, I’m genuinely shocked. Shocked, I tell you. He comes across as honest as the day is long.
Solidarity, eh comrades?
#prayforlen
Thanks, but can you IMAGINE the British Press?
Her looks, her dress sense etc….she’d be slaughtered.
Her suits remind me of Thatcher, just without the handbag
As for the rest Anne Widecombe didn't do too badly, nor plenty of other female politians
but the Tories have hit on a winning successful formula for getting a different sizeable minority to get out and vote for them (not just say they are inclined not to).
Yes, and it is pretty much age based isn't it. What happens to people when they get to 50 and beyond and why do people who were open minded, favoured equality etc, when younger suddenly change to voting Tory? Could it be that word selfish?
You make the mistake of correlating a vote for the conservatives as somehow being uncaring.
We hear reports of increased health inequalities, reduced council and social care funding; life expectancy has been falling for the past 7 years while at the same time infant mortality and child poverty have increased; NHS workers have had real world pay cuts for years as have social care and home care staff; most NHS departments I know are chronically understaffed as people don't want to do it anymore (same with the 2 Social Work Teams I work with regularly); foreign staff returning to the EU as they don't feel welcome or feel threatened (we've lost a couple of senior professionals from our team and are struggling to get replacements); the dying and disabled hounded to find work and having benefits sanctioned as a result of austerity policies (I see this first hand on a daily basis); we had PPE shortages at the start of this pandemic as our stocks of such items had been drastically cut since 2011 despite a report (2018 I think) warning of the dangers; reports of cronyism and nepotism like never before; massive increase in need for foodbanks; I could go on.
If people who vote Conservative still do so despite all that, and it's not because they're uncaring, then I can only imagine it's either that they are unaware of these issues, don't believe they really exist or believe that they are for the greater good (price worth paying in the long term).
Or something else I've missed?
An afterthought is perhaps the reason the conservatives do so well is that they don’t go around insulting large numbers of the electorate
Aside from this isnt true. They spend a massive amount of time insulting large numbers of the electorate. Britannia unchained is full of it for example as are all the attacks on the benefits shirkers. Its just people somehow seem to think they arent the ones being referred to.
#prayforlen
Private Eye summed the Liverpool thing up nicely. Noting that two of the prominent people alledgedly in charge of sorting it out from Labour and the conservatives arent exactly squeaky clean themselves.
How about if we arranged it for you to have Nicola Sturgeon on a free transfer?
I'd bite your hand off. Seen from here she is the epitomy of sound leadership.
Britannia unchained is full of it for example as are all the attacks on the benefits shirkers. Its just people somehow seem to think they arent the ones being referred to.
The Tory's are extremely selective in which people they choose to demonise and persecute. They're always minorities and always voiceless and powerless.
They're bullies, basically
And they have a compliant media who will gleefully join in with the bullying
'what happens to people when they get to 50?' This site is living proof of the stupidity of age (or any other) stereotyping. We're constantly getting gor blimey gammony snears and 'jokes' by people who are way off retirement age.
The evidence that Corbyn did more harm than good lies in mess he left the Labour Party in.
The Labour party was in a mess long before Corbyn became leader. Blair saw to that. Once he'd achieved his puppet masters' aims, he was more than happy to walk away from the ruins. Labour is little more than a shell, propped up the right wing grandees. Losing money hand over fist, desperate to court corporate sponsorship.
And then there’s len…
But this is a thread about Keith Starmer. Let's not get distracted, eh?
Solidarity, eh comrades?
How about that?
In spite of their various marked differences, the tories came together to show a united front. The Labour right decided not to bother. That's their choice of course, but they now have to take responsibility for their own actions. Starmer's bumbling uselessness shows how it's increasingly clear, that the real problem with Labour lies at the very top. Cut out all the negative elements, the neoliberals who have failed their voters, and Labour might have some chance of refloating. As it is, Labour is holed below the waterline and sinking fast.
Alan Johnson on LBC, and calling "cult of the far Left." It's supposed to be a Democratic Socialist party you head case.
He calls Starmer's first year a tremendous one.
Labour lost Redcar in 2010 whilst he was home secretary, and in the same interview he brings up the 2019 result of the same constituency as example of Labour's catastrophic result.
I do wonder what Alan Johnson would actually offer up as policy other than kicking the left at every opportunity.
Why is he even in the Labour Party?
Join John Mann and Ian Austin and bog off to a position more aligned to your values.
'Keir Starmer
@Keir_Starmer
I'm in Plymouth meeting people whose jobs rely on the defence supply chain.
We can protect their jobs and create more by adopting a ‘Buy British' approach in defence spending.'
Buy British Bombs!
Why is he even in the Labour Party?
Being instrumental in winning 3 elections?
Just a thought....
Oh... and his searingly accurate political analysis, delivered while situated next to an idiot? 😀
Buy British Bombs!
Highlighting the lefts problem with defence spending
And anything that promotes buy British
You could argue that there could be a paradigm where essentially there isn't a military or bombs, you would probably get some air time on RT and other TV stations. But whilst we aren't there yet whose bombs should we be buying?
‘what happens to people when they get to 50?’ This site is living proof of the stupidity of age (or any other) stereotyping. We’re constantly getting gor blimey gammony snears and ‘jokes’ by people who are way off retirement age.
That's great but I was actually referring to what happens in peoples lives as they get older and you get this (chart below). Labour need to pull those over 50's somehow, what sort of things do those over 50's want? (Clue - the stuff the tory party gives them)
Hang on a minute?
Weren't all you lefties only yesterday bemoaning the lack of 'proper' working class labour MP's who've had proper jobs.
Ignoring the fact that that immediately disqualifies your beardy messiah, Alan Johnson was bought up on a council estate and was a postman for years before becoming an MP
Make your bloody minds up..
Highlighting the lefts problem with defence spending
As opposed to the rights problem with defence spending and their long term trend of spending cuts whilst still wanting to be world policemen?
A good example of this being the Falklands war where Thatchers utter incompetence made the Argentinians think it was an open goal. Their only mistake was not waiting another year by which time she would have crippled our military beyond the point it would have been able to do anything.
The latest defence review is strong on big spending on BAe subsidies but rather lower on practical things for the troops.
But whilst we aren’t there yet whose bombs should we be buying?
Well it depends on what your objectives are really doesnt it?
Are you using it as a covert subsidy system for favoured areas and business sectors like the US does?
Are you wanting an export industry in which case how are you proposing to handle the massive bribes needed?
Or do you actually want to equip our troops properly for the job they are doing?
If the latter there is a good chance it will be better done by buying from overseas say getting some drones from Israel rather than wasting cash on BAe shit.
Likewise our Apaches would have been a lot cheaper if we hadnt bothered pretending with the Uk manfacturing.
Hang on a minute?
Weren’t all you lefties only yesterday bemoaning the lack of ‘proper’ working class labour MP’s who’ve had proper jobs.
So; you can only bring up Alan Johnson as an example of a 'working class' Labour MP? Johnson, by his own admission, was on the right of the Labour party. Claims to live in a 'working class community', yet actually lives in two converted 17thC cottages in East Yorkshire, 'surrounded by rich, flat farmland'. Some way from an inner city council estate in Hull. Basically, the man's full of shit, whatever his background. And it isn't about simply parachuting 'working class' Labour members into safe seats, it's about having greater representation of people of ALL backgrounds, at all levels of the party. It's about giving those from poorer and more deprived backgrounds, more voice within the party. And that's what Corbyn was doing. People like Alan Johnson hate that, because they want to be the only Working Class Bloke In The Village. Blair hates the working classes and ethnic minorities, because he's a racist Thatcherite posh boy. Gordon Brown hates the working classes because they're all bigots. And Starmer hates homosexuals. Go Labour!
Saved me the effort binners.
Johnson would have made a better Labour Leader than the last four. Unfortunately he didn't stand, because he thought the media (both sides) would slaughter him for not being university educated and I think he was correct on this front. Left or right, the politicial and the media classes all went to the same schools and Universities and treat the world of politics (and therefore the country at large) as their own personal plaything and Alan Johnson was never 'one of them'
Blimey!
So to summarise, once again, the electoral philosophy of the left: You're all ****ing bastards and I hate you all! Vote for me!
It's a mystery how it never delivered a landslide, isn't it?
Being instrumental in winning 3 elections?
Tories win plenty of elections.
So to summarise, once again, the electoral philosophy of the left: You’re all ****ing bastards and I hate you all! Vote for me!
Erm, no; that's the electoral philosophy of the right. That's why Labour's ****ed.
Now; tell me how your brylcreemed homophobic messiah is going to transform the fortunes of the Labour Party, and our society?
So to summarise, once again, the electoral philosophy of the left:
Your inability to read is really quite spectacular as is your lack of selfawareness given your whining about the local pub and your frequently expressed desire to purge all the unbelievers.
That you confuse Labour with the Left is a bit odd as well. Generally only see that from those rabid rightwingers who arent capable of anything beyond binary ideas.
Blimey!
So to summarise, once again, the electoral philosophy of the left: You’re all ****ing bastards and I hate you all! Vote for me!
It’s a mystery how it never delivered a landslide, isn’t
There is no point winning from a right wing perspective. We already have that option.
You lot are too busy clutching to the Blair years as some measure of repeatable success, just because -elections.
Keir Starmer just isn't doing it though is he?
Tories win plenty of elections.
And just look what it's enabled them to do.
Imagine being able to actually do stuff?
What a mad idea!
We don't want any of that nonsense.
Have you got any decent petitions to sign? I love a good online petition, me. Thats the way to get things done alright.
And Tweets. Lots and lots of Tweets...
There is no point winning from a right wing perspective. We already have that option.
Absolutely! I'm sure had the Torys been in power for those 13 years that labour were, they'd have done pretty much the same thing, wouldn't they? Most definitely. Their agendas were virtually indistinguishable from each other. As the last ten years have illustrated.
And just look what it’s enabled them to do.
Imagine being able to actually do stuff?
What a mad idea!
And look what Blair achieved! The stealth privatisation of public services, education and the NHS! Massive national and personal debt! Spiralling housing costs! Huge swathes of housing bought up by overseas 'investors'! Tuition fees! Plunging the nation into an illegal war! Genocide of hundreds of thousands of people in the Middle East! The demonisation of Islam and the resulting exponential wave of xenophobia towards Muslims and other ethnic minority groups! The enablement of the rise of the far right! Gordon Brown! And his best trick; condemning Britain to right-wing rule (tory or Labour, it's irrelevant as they're now just two cheeks of the same arse) FOREVER!
Fantastic.
I’m sure had the Torys been in power for those 13 years that labour were, they’d have done pretty much the same thing, wouldn’t they? Most definitely. Their agendas were virtually indistinguishable from each other. As the last ten years have illustrated.
So basically, you just want a right-wing government. So why have you expended so much time and energy on ranting about Labour? Just vote for the kind of politics you actually want; you seem to be a tory at heart, so there you go. I'm sure they'll welcome you with open arms.
^^^
Also
doubled health spending
successful humanitarian interventions in Kosovo and Liberia (Iraq not so good, unless you're Kurdish)
In fact why wrack brains, there's any number of these lists online:
Introduced the National Minimum Wage
Over 14,000 more police in England and Wales.
Cut overall crime by 32 per cent.
Record levels of literacy and numeracy in schools.
Funding for every pupil in England has doubled.
Written off up to 100 per cent of debt owed by poorest countries.
85,000 more nurses.
32,000 more doctors.
Devolved power to the Scottish Parliament.
Devolved power to the Welsh Assembly.
Dads now get paternity leave of 2 weeks for the first time.
Gift aid was worth £828 million to charities last year.
Child benefit up 26 per cent since 1997.
Delivered 2,200 Sure Start Children’s Centres.
Introduced the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
£200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & up to £300 for over-80s.
On course to exceed our Kyoto target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Restored devolved government to Northern Ireland.
Over 36,000 more teachers in England and 274,000 more support staff and teaching assistants.
All full time workers now have a right to 24 days paid holiday.
A million pensioners lifted out of poverty.
600,000 children lifted out of relative poverty.
Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents.
Scrapped Section 28 and introduced Civil Partnerships.
Brought over 1 million social homes up to standard.
Inpatient waiting lists down by over half a million since 1997.
Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since before the industrial revolution.
Free TV licences for over-75s.
Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals.
Free breast cancer screening for all women aged between 50-70.
Free off peak local bus travel for over-60s.
New Deal - helped over 1.8 million people into work.
Over 3 million child trust funds have been started.
Free eye test for over 60s.
More than doubled the number of apprenticeships.
Free entry to national museums and galleries.
Overseas aid budget more than doubled.
Heart disease deaths down by 150,000 and cancer deaths down by 50,000.
Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent.
Free nursery places for every three and four-year-olds.
Free fruit for most four to six-year-olds at school.
quibble all you like, that's better than the Tories.
No, you're a tory
You're not allowed to give nu labour, Blair or Brown any credit for anything, ever, under any circumstances.
They're all Tory's apparently. So that means you are too. And me. And everyone else who doesn't immediately scream IRAQ!!! at the mention of his name.
Keep your blinkers on, keep signing the internet petitions and railing against pretty much everyone and everything while simultaneously expecting them to vote what you loftily and sanctimoniously inform people is best for them
(Iraq not so good, unless you’re Kurdish)
Out of interest, what's the acceptable number of dead brown people per Sure Start centre?
Most of that is little more than smoke and mirrors. Most of those policies had been long proposed by 'lefties' anyway. Stuff like reducing 'poverty' was merely simply fiddling the way poverty is evaluated. Writing off 'debt owed' by certain countries, was simply about changing what it was called; all it something different, it's no longer 'debt'. one could argue it was never 'debt' in the first place anyway. New Deal was an absolute scam; forced many people into doing unpaid 'voluntary' work, and employment figures were skewed by the explosion of zero hour contracts; why have one person doing 40 hours a week, when you can have 8 doing only 5 each? Great.
Whiles there were indeed many benefits that came with a Labour government(surely it should be Labour's job to try to improve society for the many?), most were short lived, as we've now seen. Much of the extra spending was simply because of inflation and rising costs anyway. And much of it was possible because of massive borrowing; we're still paying the price for that now. Blair failed to properly regulate the financial sector, who just went and set their own terms of interest etc. That's gone well,too.
So it's easy to reel off a load of numbers, but you have to look at the real picture; today's Britain is mired in deprivation, inequality and injustice. And it was Blair's New Labour that paved the way:
Much of what New Labour did, was rob Peter to pay Paul. Things like 'terrorism' legislation were introduced to enable government restrictions on freedoms. Blair wanted electronic controls on asylum seekers and refugees. If you were white, middle class and relatively affluent, life under Blair was great. It wasn't so great for millions of others. Wages have dropped steadily, in real terms, since Blair came to power. Housing costs have risen massively though. So people have less economic 'power' than they did previously. Etc. You can pick and choose all sorts of statistics to try to prove whatever argument suits your own agenda; truth is, Britain is a worse place now than it was before Blair came to power. A few years of boom and bust have done nothing to make it any better.
You’re not allowed to give nu labour, Blair or Brown any credit for anything, ever, under any circumstances.
I think being one of the orchestrators of mass genocide kind of blots your record, somewhat, no? Shall we give Mussolini credit for getting the transport system to be more punctual?
Out of interest, what’s the acceptable number of dead brown people per Sure Start centre?
Killed by homicidal dictator Sadam? Or were they none of our business?
orchestrators of mass genocide
We've reached la point d'Goduinne and not a moment too soon
Killed by homicidal dictator Sadam? Or were they none of our business?
They were absolutely our business, given that he had WMD aimed at London. Oddly, they didn't seem to be our business before 2003.
If we're including historical figures, can we have Churchill as well?
They were absolutely our business,
So what would you have done, given the opportunity to topple a literally (marsh Arabs, Halabja) genocidal dictator?
Anyway. Dipping back out of this depressing thread.
You're not really very 'glass half full' you lefty lot, are you?
So what would you have done, given the opportunity to topple a literally (marsh Arabs, Halabja) genocidal dictator?
The "opportunity", as you put it, was created by the Blair government lying to parliament about a non-existent threat to the UK. The lie was an argument based on self-interest rather than humanitarian concerns, and the resulting war left 5 million people displaced, up to a million dead and the emergence of ISIS requiring a second war.
But it's ok because pensioners got free TV licenses.
Now; tell me how your brylcreemed homophobic messiah is going to transform the fortunes of the Labour Party, and our society?
I don't think he's homophobic, I doubt anyone serious thinks he's homophobic. But the left think it's fine to throw that insult at him. I really wonder why labour and the left self immolate at every opportunity.
So it’s easy to reel off a load of numbers, but you have to look at the real picture; today’s Britain is mired in deprivation, inequality and injustice. And it was Blair’s New Labour that paved the way:
Today's Britain is a lot better place than it was 30 years ago. The fact that the left can't accept that there has been progress is what is tearing labour apart.
just because -elections
Yes. Elections. They matter. Keep wishing that they didn’t if you want.
Anyone thinking that the Blair&Brown years were just Tory light (and that was pretty much my view at the time, I freely admit) should have had that filter drop from their eyes in the years since. Especially those years with a Conservative majority.
Not bothering with the Iraq stuff these days. It’s a mess. It was a mistake. It was unforgivable in my opinion. It would also have happened without Labour being in power at the time. Blair has a black mark against his name for ever. But had he been leader of the opposition at the time rather than PM, the UK would have supported the USA anyway.
If the latter there is a good chance it will be better done by buying from overseas say getting some drones from Israel rather than wasting cash on BAe shit.
Likewise our Apaches would have been a lot cheaper if we hadnt bothered pretending with the Uk manfacturing.
Can you imagine the furore if we buy Israeli drones, the left will have a seizure
As for getting Brits to manufacture American technology, fine by me.
Not bothering with the Iraq stuff these days. It’s a mess. It was a mistake. It was unforgivable in my opinion. It would also have happened without Labour being in power at the time. Blair has a black mark against his name for ever. But had he been leader of the opposition at the time rather than PM, the UK would have supported the USA anyway.
Can't disagree. Just that...
So what would you have done?
...is not an easy one to answer. Robin Cook had a clear position. Thought he was wrong at the time, as an old lefty in favour of getting rid of dictators when possible, at a time of optimism (remember that?) Hindsight eh.
I don’t think he’s homophobic, I doubt anyone serious thinks he’s homophobic. But the left think it’s fine to throw that insult at him. I really wonder why labour and the left self immolate at every opportunity.
I don't think Corbyn's detractors seriously believe him to be anti-Semitic, but that didn't stop the usual suspects on here.
Hindsight eh.
I thought Robin Cook was right at the time. And still do. And it was one for the things that stopped me voting Labour in the past. But theses many years later the Iraq mess doesn’t stop me voting Labour just because Saint Stop The War Corbyn has lost the parliamentary whip. Utterly fed up with the “what about Iraq” line taken whenever someone proposes that having an actual Labour government can be the interests of the UK, even one that has successfully widened it’s remit to make more of the population feel included in their programme, not just us lefties.
Utterly fed up with the “what about Iraq” line taken whenever someone proposes that having an actual Labour government is in the interests of the UK.
I agree that it doesn't have much/ any relevance to the merits of a Starmer government, but don't you think we should consider a disastrous misadventure, justified by a lie, when judging the Blair government?
even one that has successfully widened it’s remit to make more of the population feel included in their programme, not just us lefties.
What's your basis for this assertion?
Defence? CBA (cost benefit analysis) says a toss up between 40% extra for atom bombs floating about in submarines (has hardly kept the Ruskies at bay) or eg meet the nurses' pay claim in full.
Boris just announced more missiles and more subs as they’re really phallic
Hellloooooo laydeeeeez. Want to see my trident?
#buttonmushroom
Most of those policies had been long proposed by ‘lefties’ anyway.
Wait a god dang cotton picking minute there, you mean by appealing to centre swing voters labour were able to win elections, form governments and enact left wing policies?
HOLY SHITBALLS!
kelvin
Full MemberIt would also have happened without Labour being in power at the time.
There is absolutely no proof of that.
Yes had there been a Conservative government at the time they would almost certainly have wanted to support the US in a military adventure in the Middle East. But there was huge public opposition to war and I can't imagine for a moment that Labour in opposition would have also not opposed war, even under Tony Blair.
Huge public oppostion, combined with Labour opposition, and the LibDems (all 56 LibDems opposed war) would have made it very difficult, if not impossible, for a Tory government to commit Britian to war.
As it was a Labour government, along with an enthusiastic Tory opposition, made going to war very easy.
I'll remind you that in opposition Tony Blair opposed and voted against every single privatisation legislation introduced by Conservative governments, and I mean every single
johnx2
Free MemberSo what would you have done, given the opportunity to topple a literally (marsh Arabs, Halabja) genocidal dictator?
It's interesting that despite your obvious admiration for Tony Blair the one thing you agree with his critics on is that he is a liar.
Yes you are right, toppling Saddam Hussein was the aim of going to war. It had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction. Tony Blair lied, to the British people and the world.
Not only did he deny that regime change was the aim of war but he unequivocally claimed the opposite. He very clearly stated that war was not "inevitable" and all Iraq had to do to avoid war was to allow access to UN weapons inspectors. His excuse for going to war was that Iraq had not complied.
War is a serious business which is rarely justified. Whatever the reasons for going to war it should never be based on lies.
Now you could argue that there was a strong and compelling case for launching military action to facilitate regime change in Iraq. But the mechanism for that under international law is through the United Nations. Tony Blair ultimately decided to ignore the United Nations (an organisation established precisely to resolve disputes without the need for war) because he obviously believed that the case for military intervention was too weak.
BTW Tony Blair never expressed any concern about the horrific numbers of deaths (a figure vastly greater than anything that happened in Halabja and the Mesopotamian Marshes), especially among children, international sanctions against Iraq caused. So it's hard to believe that a man with such a close personal relationship with George Bush and the US oil lobby was primarily motivated by a deep humanitarian concern.
I'll remind you that after invasion only the oil ministry was defended from looters, hospital were left to ransacked.
kelvin
Full MemberIt would also have happened without Labour being in power at the time.
There is absolutely no proof of that.
Yes had there been a Conservative government at the time they would almost certainly have wanted to support the US in a military adventure in the Middle East. But there was huge public opposition to war and I can't imagine for a moment that Labour in opposition would have also not opposed war, even under Tony Blair.
Huge public oppostion, combined with Labour opposition, and the LibDems (all 56 LibDems opposed war) would have made it very difficult, if not impossible, for a Tory government to commit Britian to war.
As it was a Labour government, along with an enthusiastic Tory opposition, made going to war very easy.
I'll remind you that in opposition Tony Blair opposed and voted against every single privatisation legislation introduced by Conservative governments, and I mean every single one there were no exceptions. Once installed as prime minister he embarked on a privatistion programme. Obviously there was no opposition from the Tories so he less trouble with his privatisation than any Tory government would have had. There are other examples.
It's not just winning elections that matters, otherwise just joining the Tories might be the easist solution. Sometimes it's what you do in power that matters. I strongly believe that Britian might not have been involved in the Iraq War had the Tories been in government. Obviously we'll never know.
I can’t imagine for a moment that Labour in opposition would have also not opposed war, even under Tony Blair.
Hurd kept the UK out of Kosovo. Nothing in it for us. Concentration camps in Europe ffs as gassing towns in Iraq doesn't seem to do it for anyone. How do you feel about the Liberia intervention?
If you're going to drag up some of the past (as a reason for I dunno, bad stuff about Starmer now?) at least get the whole picture.
While you’re at it, why not go and ask the population of Sierra Leone what they think about Tony Blair and his disastrous foreign interventions?
But.... but.... IRAQ!!!