Forum menu
This is what happens when you have no convictions of your own and simply parrot what others tell you to parrot....
In an interview with the Observer, the prime minister said he should have read the speech more carefully and “held it up to the light a bit more”.
I had no idea – and my speechwriters didn’t know either.
And this is how Starmer deals with a highly controversial and sensitive subject such as immigration, he doesn't bother to read carefully the speech he is about to make.
I wouldn’t have used those words if I had known they were, or even would be, interpreted as an echo of Powell.
He still doesn't get it, it is the intent of his speach and policy that is wrong and racist, the comparison to the Enoch Powel speach just confirms it. It isn't because the speeches' are comparable that is the problem, it would still be racist fearmongering if Powel had never existed.
About time. What took him so long?
He said it was the case that <a href=" removed link " data-link-name="in body link" data-component="auto-linked-tag">Labour had “become too distant from working-class people on things like immigration”, but he said: “This wasn’t the way to do it in this current environment.”
It's a conundrum. It absolutely wasn't the way to do it. But I'd argue there isn't a way to do it. Anything Labour do, be it policy, tone, language... Reform are sitting there ready to say it's either not enough, or Labour are pretending to get it when really they don't.
This is what is causing "incalculable damage" to the UK economy, wealthy powerful ****s for who having everything would still not be enough and will always demand more. These are the people, the abusers of so many lives, a labour leader should be standing up to, instead of punching down on the poor, the vulnerable, the desperate and the disabled.
It isn't because the speeches' are comparable that is the problem, it would still be racist fearmongering if Powel had never existed.
Quite. And the point is that anyone with a reasonable interest in politics, such a prime minister and his speech writers, would be expected to be aware of Enoch Powell's infamous Rivers of Blood speech.
You don't need to know the details of the actual words used in Powell's speech to know the general thrust of the speech and the message it was conveying. Anyone with a basic understanding of contemporary UK politics would have automatically made the connection between the two speeches.
It is also worth remembering that when Starmer was desperate to become Labour leader he boasted of his alleged forensic skills as a barrister in his "10 Pledges" which he concluded by pledging "forensic opposition to the Tories in Parliament".
I am sure that a barrister with an abundance of forensic skills fully understands the likely effect of using the term "incalculable damage" when discussing recent immigration into the UK.
I suspect the only thing Starmer actually "regrets" with regards to that gutter-raking speech of his is that it didn't have the desired effect, ie it didn't give Labour a big boost in the opinion polls, in fact it probably gave Reform a boost.
I am sure that had Starmer's tribute act to Enoch Powell given his government a reasonable popularity boost Starmer would have taken all the criticism from lefties and liberals in his stride and regretted nothing.
Electrification of the Midlands main line has been paused (cancelled) just as it was finally starting to reach areas that would actually feel the difference. The north continues to languish in the dark ages whilst the rest of the modern world has been on electric rails for decades. I guess we'll continue with climate change and choking on train fumes for a good while longer then.
Economy has shrunk a bit ... In May. That's two consecutive months.
Governments will never get it will they? They don't get growth without new money being spent on the proper investment.
That's why we sit here flat-lining.
Not necessarily me who wants growth but they claim they do.
We really are stuck with these malfunctioning economies.
The pipes need to open but fiscal rules and OBR analysis stop all that.
Absolute dead-end thinking.
https://twitter.com/PatriciaNPino/status/1942567203661840443?t=iB6_oEUvM6mfatEt2kCDcQ&s=19
Economy has shrunk a bit ... In May. That's two consecutive months.
Jeezus Rachel in Accounts isn't going to start crying again is she???
FFS the last time she got all tearful it spooked the markets and the cost of government borrowing rose significantly.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2l99eegzpo
Well that's the stupid game they play.
The 'markets' follow expectations of where they believe future interest rates are going.
Who's in charge of rates? Ahem.
So there's a thing for her and the BoE to figure out. Meaning they could cut them sooner and quicker because that would serve public purpose (rather than pay income to people with wealth).
The market has no choice but to follow.
Our Chancellor believes the bond market is some mythical entity guiding the sovereign decision making that she - unbelievably as it may seem has the power to control.
Bond issuance is a political choice that serves the wealthy so everything else can suffer and sit under the demands of an engineered market.
When she goes crying and the market has a wobble - just simply watch how quickly despite all the newspaper bullshit - things rectify themselves. And if they didn't the BoE can step on and simply purchase more bonds.
Just about every major indices is rallying currently. Assets are enjoying the time of their life (crypto etc) because of scale of the money pouring into them. The same money that could be spent on the good stuff.
But there's no money for us. OBR said so. Fiscal rules said so
That's the ftse 100 following the delayed (already happend) injection of world M2.
https://twitter.com/normalislandnws/status/1944112160248148028?s=61&t=27Xz8oI3pGlaNEQvowJBcg
Oh good Christ. Labour and especially Reeves really do deserve their lack of popularity.
Reeves to say cuts to City red tape will bring trickle-down benefits to households
Imagine only having half-baked failed Tory plans in your head. Then calling yourself the Labour party.
(You see why Centrism is really about right-wing economics? It's nothing to do with being in the middle or moderate. It's to do with protecting and adding to the wealth of the already wealthy. If you thought Centrism was a solution to our problems you're no more clued up than the average Reform voter economically. But at least they come from a position of desperation.)
https://twitter.com/PositiveMoneyUK/status/1945070251399340403?t=EIejigUeSqn_Qy6g48qpPQ&s=19
And here even if hypothetical - this is good to see. Remember Starmer ejected Corbyn and therefore created the split. So none of this splitting the vote nonsense that must be attributed to the failure of Starmer's government in the first instance.
Life of Brian memes not really hitting it.
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1944825235133337895?t=Z4gT5c62-XciQqmSyoGP_g&s=19
They really do deserve every last ounce of this. Totally of their own making.
hooray for demand side subsidy, that's worked great all the other times we've tried it
Inflation is up again. No real surprises there but it's still not a good direction for the government to be in.
Again, paying out money to people with wealth drives the price level higher - keeping interest rates high makes things more expensive. It's the general price level.
That's why inflation is sticky..
We need cuts.
Inflation is up again. No real surprises there but it's still not a good direction for the government to be in.
Again, paying out money to people with wealth drives the price level higher - keeping interest rates high makes things more expensive. It's the general price level.
That's why inflation is sticky.
We need cuts.
Again, paying out money to people with wealth drives the price level higher - keeping interest rates high makes things more expensive. It's the general price level.
If credit is cheap, people will buy more stuff, or they will pay a higher price for the same thing. Not only that but they will have more spare cash each month because debt repayments are lower (e.g. mortgage, car etc). How stupid do you have to be to think that lowering the base rate (singular, there's only one of them) will lower inflation?
Also, how stupid do you have to be to think that "wealthy people" sit in their mansions collecting interest payments off bank deposits? Jesus wept, were you born yesterday?!
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y7zqdwzqyo
Authoritarianism really is a central feature of Starmer's pseudo-Labour Party.
An alternative strategy might be not to impose a three-line whip on Labour MPs to support Tory policies which they were never elected to implement.
How stupid do you have to be to think that lowering the base rate (singular, there's only one of them) will lower inflation?
Well clearly you don't follow real world economics do you?
You know there is no paper and no supporting evidence that high interest rates lower inflation?
I ask you how stupid are you if you've believe paying more money to the wealthy lowers inflation. A literal injection of income for the wealthy.
And also explain to me why inflation has remained sticky with high interest rates. You are literally pouring more money into people's pockets that have the power to remove resources from the rest of us.
If credit is cheap, people will buy more stuff, or they will pay a higher price for the same thing
So when the UK had low interest rates we had low inflation - largely speaking. Just look at the numbers around 2010-2020 until the pandemic showed up.
We are paying more the for the stuff now. Energy, water, housing, cars. Because high interest rates lifts the price level of everything
Think it through and study more.
Your distributional analysis is lacking.
https://twitter.com/tonywestonuk/status/1945392358687682860?t=FRgFuVn6aoaz4aEG0pF3Wg&s=19
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g8v33g1dgo
"But if you see a black person walking down the street, you see straight away that they're black. They are different types of racism"
It is truly remarkable that someone can be accused of racism and is suspended from the Labour Party for making a comment which any fair-minded person would see as being perfectly reasonable, and yet the leader of the party can make a very public comment about immigrants causing "incalculable damage" to Britain and he gets away with it without any sort disciplinary action or investigation being taken.
i cannot see anything racist about Diane Abbott's comment and whatever criticism may be levelled against her it pales into insignificance compared to Sir Keir Starmer's very nasty Enoch Powell tribute speech.
It would appear that Diane Abbott's only crime is that she isn't leader of the Labour Party.
Sir Keir Starmer’s crackdown on dissent has been a troubling hallmark of his leadership. Muzzling protest over welfare cuts won’t make the policies fairer or more popular.
The problem isn’t Ms Maskell. It’s a party that can’t tolerate its conscience. Ministers who once revolted but now back the purge expose the factional logic at the heart of Starmerism.
The message from Downing Street now looks less like authority and more like insecurity, especially when the rebels’ concerns are widely shared by the public.
Unable to win by force of argument, Sir Keir opts for the argument of force. It’s a sign of weakness, not strength.
Polling shows Labour is losing support not because of internal splits but because voters are disappointed with the substance of its policies. Labour has the evidence that economic populism works, but won’t use it, reportedly out of deference to donor sensitivities.
I cannot recall ever reading a Guardian editorial more critical of Labour....... well done Keir Starmer you have managed to piss off the Guardian with your hard-right policies and authoritarianism as well as Labour voters, that is quite an achievement!
The most damning accusation in imo is the claim that Starmer is deliberately not implementing economic policies which he has evidence will work because he is putting the interests of donors before those of voters.
but won’t use it, reportedly out of deference to donor sensitivities.
And that is exactly the point I made on the voting for 16/17 year olds, and have been banging on about for ages, political finance reform is what is required, the rest is just rearranging the deckchairs on the titanic. The influence of wealth on politics has made democracy a sham, nothing more than a magicians trick where we get to vote on the "card" the magician(doners) present to us.
PR and reform of the second house will do sweet FA if the wealthy still get to stack the deck before we are allowed our rigged choice.
Diane Abbott suspended for stating the blindingly bloody obvious. As a majority skin coloured immigrant with an accent I don't experience racism (EU definition) until I open my mouth which I sometimes avoid doing. French law covers different types of race discrimintaion with suitable laws. For example if someone discriminates on the bassis of my accent the possible fine is 35 000e IIRC, if they discriminate on the basis of my name that's another law they've broken so that an employer that sorts CVs on the basis of name can also be fined. Clearly these things are hard to prove and discrimination still goes on but at least different aspects of racism are recognised by the state and illegal.
Given her her electoral record if any MP has a solid mandate to govern it's Diane Abbott. An MP of the people for the people.
political finance reform is what is required
No the problem in this case lies squarely with the current Labour Party leadership and the complete lack of meaningful democratic structures within the party.
How much an individual donates to the Labour Party should not make one iota of difference to party policy. Individual donors should be making donations because they support the party and its policies, not to create a party which supports them.
Having a political party which is democrat and that cannot be bought by individuals is perfectly achievable, it isn't pie end of sky. It doesn't require legislation.
Whether legislation is required to curb the political power of individuals is separate to the issue of Starmer embracing hard-right economic policies, he doesn't have to, it is a choice which he has made. Or at least Morgan McSweeney has.
"But if you see a black person walking down the street, you see straight away that they're black. They are different types of racism"
Why's she got to play "divide and rule" though? That's a white person's game.
The labour leadership is playing divide and rule, as was highlighted in the Forde report, which highlighted the hierarchical racism that has been weaponised to purge the left from the party, and that report was then misrepresented by labour to do exactly that. Which this is just another example of.
That's racism, multi21; attributing different characteristics to different races. Saying something is a white man's or black man's game is racist. You need to say "white supremacist's game" or something that doesn't imply all white people play "divide and rule".
She's just stating the obvious, it isn't any kind of a game, just listen to what she has to say, take it on board and treat people on the basis of how they interact with you not the colour of their skin, their accent, their name, their dress, their gender... .
Oh dear, vanishing post syndrome again, has my post dissappeared into the Internet ether or will it appear shortly?
Oh dear, vanishing post syndrome again, has my post dissappeared into the Internet ether or will it appear shortly?
Huh? Who said that?! 😉 It's there now I think!
PS. for those unaware, my "divide and rule" comment was just poking fun with one of her previous gaffes (please don't ban me mods!)
Gaffes come and gaffes go.
Irony, thankfully, is eternal - a point well demonstrated by the last few posts.
Starmer getting rid of an unfortunate self-caricature like Abbott is pretty meh, TBH. But the symbolism is not. It further demonstrates Starmer's cowardice in not wanting to rock the boat of the vested interests and little englander. Tory-lite - an accusation once levelled amusingly at the Libdems.
🙄
Starmer is incapable of the serving the public good. The levers he selects are that of a desperate capitalist drunk at the wheel trying to keep himself in the correct lane.
It doesn't matter what the choices are - none of them are about making things better actually for working people, that he likes to cite so much.
Under Labour growth is flat; unemployment up, inflation up. Which is basically increased cost of living. They are not making decisions to make life better. They are trying to survive by appealing to the same 'morons' the liberal's detest.
That's what it's about. Appeasing the class the liberals hate. He's using the same arguments - but with the lies packed high. Wealth is increasing for the few at the same time many are suffering. The stock-market has become a detached lottery for speculation.
It gets worse from here on in. Here's hoping the left sink him one way or another.
5 years to invest.
After a year, what have we got?
Tory policies with an apology rather than Tory policies with a gloat.
Great.
Well we now have a much clearer Idea of what today's Labour Party actually stands for. And that's quite important I reckon.
I am not sure where you are getting "Tory policies with an apology" from though, I'm not seeing even a hint of remorse. In fact what I am seeing is Starmer doubling down and going as far as punishing Labour MPs who won't back Tory policies which they were elected to oppose.
I see the current UK government as unapologetically right-wing.
After a year, what have we got?
Extra investment in the NHS and SEN stand out for me, but that’s just plugging two holes in a country leaking like a colander. So much to fix. So much of it is about stopping things getting worse though, and they’ll only get praise for big actual improvements. All this when the country is primed (partly Labour’s fault) to see tax rises as betrayal… when any party in government now would need to be raising taxes and increasing spending far more… just to stop the slide.
Here's hoping the left sink him one way or another
Let's hope not as that way Reform leads. The 'left' are not a credible force in British politics other than as protest politicians within the ranks of Labour.
Let's hope not as that way Reform leads.
It's that kind of argument that has led to where we are now.
Let's hope not as that way Reform leads. The 'left' are not a credible force in British politics other than as protest politicians within the ranks of Labour
Doesn't bear up. Last time I checked it was Starmer and the good ship Centrism that was on the rocky seas of fascism. Of course Centrism always chooses fascism over the left.
Botched Centrism has every step of the way lead to the right-wing wonks gaining further traction. Let's face it Starmer has stomped on the left and Reform became stronger. So not sure where your logic came from. He's literally the person responsible for the left split.
If you think this government is the credible alternative then you're not being honest or critical.
This government has set up (as many saw coming) the downfall of itself by being totally useless at every possible intersection.
The policies bear it out, the polls bear it out and further to this everyone bloody hates Starmer because of this.
I mean here we go again - it's looking like OFWAT are going to be replaced by another regulator. FFS. Voted in on change but more rubbish.
At the point a regulator might work - would be the point you may as well nationalise anyway and remove the profit inefficiency.
Let's hope not as that way Reform leads. The 'left' are not a credible force in British politics
No of course the Left are not a credible force in British politics, they have no credible political party for that to be possible. The Left for a long time put all their eggs in one basket based on the now very outdated belief that the Labour Party was still a credible vehicle for change.
Hopefully, thanks to Starmer, that is now starting to change and by the time of the next general election voters will have a genuine choice other than Reform UK's simplistic pseudo "alternative".
Personally I think that Starmer's/McSweeney's latest gaff, removing the Labour whip from Diane Abbott, will likely accelerate the process.
That issue appears to have created two very clear divisions, on the one hand fair-minded rational people can see that the comment Diane Abbott made was perfectly reasonable and on the other hand irrational people on hard-right, such as opinion writers on the Spectator and Daily Telegraph, are celebrating the fact that she has been suspended.
We know which side of that division Starmer is on.....on the side of the hard-right of course.
So the leader of the Labour Party, who recently made a disgusting racist speech echoing Enoch Powell and talked about immigrants causing "incalculable damage", has just removed the Labour whip from a black woman who has faced racism on a daily basis all of her life accusing her of racism.
Could that possibly highlight the need for a new party to confront the relentless drive to the far-right in British politics anymore?
Can you remember the good old days when the Libs enjoyed taking a stake to the heart of Bozza as he dragged democracy kicking and screaming?
Rachel Reeves considers overruling supreme court in £44bn car finance scandal
Exclusive: Chancellor could step in if justices uphold entirety of ruling over commission paid to brokers
"The City has been anxiously waiting to see whether justices fully uphold the appeal court decision that paying commission to brokers who arranged the motor loans"
It's so funny how they will consider intervention in the 'National economy's interest' when it comes to protecting private capital but won't consider intervention say in the BoE interest rate decision. I'd like to bet one of those would have a better outcome for the nation interest.
I was just about to post a link to that article. ^^^
If Reeves lets the lenders off the hook for this it will be one more nail firmly banged into Labour's coffin. We can't let those poor lenders suffer - but it's fine to rip-off borrowers.
Another sign that 'ordinary working people' really are of no concern to them.
Blimey, Sir Keir Starmer is now as unpopular as Jeremy Corbyn. It doesn't seem to bother Labour MPs though, although perhaps they are too scared to say anything?
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than Keir Starmer, a major poll has revealed.
According to the latest Political Pulse tracker by Ipsos, Sir Keir Starmer’s net approval rating has dropped to minus 34 – a three-point decrease from the previous month and now one point below Jeremy Corbyn’s.
Blimey, Sir Keir Starmer is now as unpopular as Jeremy Corbyn. It doesn't seem to bother Labour MPs though, although perhaps they are too scared to say anything?
You have said the same thing in different ways 14,706 times at this point. Give it a rest. I only visit this place once or twice a week now and post in political threads even more rarely, because they're ruined by you and DrJ.
@Mark << for info the bullying on this place (not necessarily of me) is why I let my premium membership lapse.
they're ruined by you and DrJ.
I think I’ve posted twice in this thread in the last month. I can’t be bothered to look further back. So that’s some pretty effective ruining. Go me! I posted the same in the chickpea curry thread, so you might want to avoid that too.
I only visit this place once or twice a week now and post in political threads even more rarely, because they're ruined by you and DrJ.
So you only visit once or twice a week because the political threads have been ruined by me and DrJ, have you considered looking at any of the non-political threads?
There are only about three active political threads, this one, the Nigel Farage thread, and the Donald Trump thread, maybe broaden your interests and have a look at the other threads?
And the revelation that Keir Starmer is now apparently as unpopular as Jeremy Corbyn is (actually slightly more unpopular) has not been said in 14,706 different ways.
Anyway fire away with your views of the UK government, on the UK government thread, or is that too challenging and ad hominems easier?
The latest opinion poll gives Reform UK an unprecedented 14 point lead over the governing party, you could start with that 💡
There are only about three active political threads, this one, the Nigel Farage thread, and the Donald Trump thread
I think I have never posted on the Trump or Farage threads, so you've ruined those all own your own. Chapeau!