Starmer has just definitively turned the page on his human rights legal career with a u-turn on Shamima Begum.

He’s gone from Labour light to Tory light to full on authoritarian ****.

I’m beginning to detest him more than the Tories. The Tories were always the nasty party but to be on the side of right and good then sell your soul to Tory think seems even worse.

The clip Ed is on about…

'Should Shamima Begum be allowed back in order to face justice in the UK?'

Labour leader Keir Starmer was questioned on #BBCBreakfast after Shamima Begum lost her latest legal challenge over the decision to deprive her of British citizenship https://t.co/ISCqbCQjbg pic.twitter.com/eF3DTSSEa4

— BBC Breakfast (@BBCBreakfast) February 23, 2023

As I said in the other thread… he may well be technically right about the courts taking the “right decision”… they probably did given the law. It was Javid’s decision that was wrong, and this government is wrong to stick to it, and the Labour leader should be saying so… not defending the government decision on “national security grounds”… the UK can do better than that… we expect the rest of the world to.

I liked that he’s recycled some of that nice Mr Blairs old catchphrases.

I used to like those. They were very reassuring

They used to be good at snappy, catchy slogans, the Labour Party, but then they started engraving pledges on stones and stuff like that and its been all downhill since then.

The Tories have definitely seized the initiative on 3 word slogans, but I feel that with our constantly reduced attention spans due to Instagram and Love Island, Labour should experiment with one word slogans.

Maybe they could do massive billboards with a picture of Dominic Raab and just the word ****! on it? Or possibly just dispense with the word and bombard peoples social media feeds with an angry emoji above a picture of Theresa Coffey eating a turnip? 😡

Just stick the NHS logo on the side of a bus. Job jobbed.

He should have gone full gammon and said that she should face the full force of world beating British law and if guilty bang her up forever and throw away the keys.
If innocent of course , she can toddle off and live her life.

My word, with such an open goal, it’s just vacuous verbiage.

Yup. At a time where he should be hammering home his advantage with some eye-opening policies he’s doing the very opposite. The poll lead means the voters are as receptive as they’re ever going to be to new ideas and policies on the radical side of the spectrum, but instead it appears to be breeding quite a bit of complacency. On this evidence we can ‘look forward’ to a Starmer govt looking very much like Sunak’s: Technocratic, aloof, restrained, and spending most of its time telling us why they can’t do the things everyone wants.

saw it live and direct and he’s a more engaging IRL…..not much mind 🙂
but that doesnt bother me, I was safe and boring after the crazy ghost train ride the Tories have given us.

Anything is better than the Tories, but jeez, I’m even more underwhelmed and disappointed after today.

Anything is better than the Tories

Blair proved that wasn’t necessarily so.

I am very much looking forward to life after the next general election. The whole dynamics will certainly be very different, even if not much else is.

This thread will be particularly interesting.

Kier is doing his best Harry Kane impression – he’s got an open goal for the election but you can’t help feeling he’s going to hoof it into row Z in the last minute of extra time! 🤣

This thread will be particularly interesting.

If you mean that any short comings of a Labour government (if there is one) will be picked on and picked over by people who want the current shower of a government out… then you’re bang on. They won’t get a free ride just because they win (if they win), they’ll be watched and criticised at every turn. As it should be.

Just popping into the wrong thread because it’s all totally fatiguing these days – to say Truss’s laughable and made up fiscal hole has now turned into a Tory surplus.

An absolute mockery of classic economic understanding.

Honestly they’re all full of shit when it comes to government finances.

And it is simply this as a starting point that is creating havoc with the economy. Government doesn’t spend – then it’s downhill there’s no way around it.

Recessions follow surpluses because you’ve deleted money from the economy. Ask Clinton.

I’m beginning to detest him more than the Tories. The Tories were always the nasty party but to be on the side of right and good then sell your soul to Tory think seems even worse.

I’m totally with you. You get what you expect with Tories. Everyone should never be surprised but somehow it creates pages of centrist anger.

Starmer just gets worse every time he opens his stupid mouth.

Oh and the Fed are still hawkish and acting shocked when interest rates rises are having the opposite desired effect to inflation. I.e it’s ticking back up and driving money around the finance sector.

You get what you expect with Tories. Everyone should never be surprised but somehow it creates pages of centrist anger.

…yet… you came to this thread to post your take on the Tories and their handling of the economy and explanation of it.

[ I agree with your points by the way, but the weird idea that only “centrists” are angry with what the Tories have been inflicting on us, and are writing about it… an odd one. We’re all angry… and that “we” is getting bigger all the time. The “everyone else is a centrist” attitude is getting old fast. ]

weird idea that only “centrists” are angry with what the Tories have been inflicting on us…….We’re all angry…

I’m not, and I totally get rone’s point. Tory politicians don’t make me angry, because they simply behave exactly how I would expect them to behave. Tories being Tories is no shocker to me.

It is people who don’t behave how I would expect them to behave who are likely to make me feel angry.

One of the reasons that I don’t feel particularly angry with Starmer is because I expect very little from him.

On the other hand if Mick Lynch was to start acting like an arsehole that would really piss me off. Obviously.

weird idea that only “centrists” are angry with what the Tories have been inflicting on us…….We’re all angry…

You see I prefer to be angry at neoliberalism. That infers i don’t support that ideology. Irrespective of its mouthpiece.

However the difference with centrists is that they accept (more or less) neoliberalism – they would argue it just needs to be done by ‘grown-ups.

It’s important to draw a distinction between what a Tory is and what neoliberalism is. Because Labour can and will fulfill the latter.

That’s why centrists annoy the **** out of me.

Guardian columns are full of centrists being annoyed at Tories they indirectly supported. And then shocked at the outcome.

That’s bone-headed.

I still hate Tories Kelvin and still join in the but there is definitely a Guardian powered shock factor displayed most days.

Tories have never been about hope for me, they’ve always destroyed everything. Being front and centre in a pit village.

Labour were about hope.

That’s why they’re disappointing currently, and for a few weeks in 2017 – positivity was in the air – whilst every Binners type, Poly Toynbee, Freedland etc were digging into Corbyn. And now they are all appalled a the right-wing mess that lay before us!

Give me a break.

Centrism took Brexit and made it the single issue rather than looking at 40 years of shit that right-wing governments had laid before us.

Guardian columns are full of centrists being annoyed at Tories they indirectly supported. And then shocked at the outcome.

It is similar on here. Those who express their hatred for the Tories the most seem to be the same people who want the Labour Party to be more like the Tories.

You can’t win elections if you are not more like the Tories..blah…blah…blah

Just join the Tory Party if the only thing that matters is winning elections.

It is similar on here. Those who express their hatred for the Tories the most seem to be the same people who want the Labour Party to be more like the Tories.

You can’t win elections if you are not more like the Tories..blah…blah…blah

Just join the Tory Party if the only thing that matters is winning elections

Well they’re going to get what they want again – and be shocked when it doesn’t work how they think.

Lol it funny how Tories win elections by being mean as **** but Labour can’t currently string a robust argument for counter policies in this climate – which would make so much difference to so many lives.

I’m **** embarrassed by the state of things.

Just join the Tory Party if the only thing that matters is winning elections.

Lmfao. Yeah just join the winning side – if ideology is a waste of time.

I mean we all knew Truss was pushing the boat out but this ridiculous idea that she’s responsible for crashing the economy and lifting interest rates is a flat out distortion of everything that happened.

You know what happens when a fiat currency drops? It gets bought back up again but apparently she crashed the ‘economy’ for it to be impossible to recover.

Seriously stop. The UK has massive real structural economic issues that need fixing but it’s currency ramping up and down is not one of them.

This didn’t stop Marina Purkiss, Ian Dunt and all that lot claiming Truss had crashed the economy and made mortgages more expensive (wtf they never heard of monetary policy?)

Hey Centrists the real economy has been dying on its low wage arse for years but I’m guessing your house price inflated and your career has been great.

These people still think Starmer is god.

Right-wingers the lot of them.

So it turns out that the Tories in the Conservative Party don’t have a monopoly over cronyism and crass incompetence.

Here in Centrist paradise, Croydon, the Tories in the Labour Party (who are busy expelling lefties) are every bit a match:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-scandal-hit-croydon-council-went-bust-with-1-6bn-debt-8v8r9qc2j

The report concludes by asking councillors to consider passing the document to the police for investigation of possible misconduct in public office. It also recommends they review the £437,000 settlement paid to the council’s former chief executive, Jo Negrini.

After accepting the payoff in 2020, Negrini issued a statement saying she had left the council with “all the structures” in place to see it through. Within ten weeks Croydon was bankrupt.

The litany of failures under Negrini — who has been dubbed “Negreedy” by council staff angry at the size of her payout — is huge.

This is why in Blairite Croydon Labour actually lost control to the Tories last year whilst in sharp contrast in Corbynite Islington Labour actually consolidation their power and romped home:

https://www.islingtontribune.co.uk/article/whats-red-and-red-and-red-all-over-islington-bar-one-opposition-slither

But it is Corbyn supporters that get expelled. Not one single right-wing Croydon Labour member has been expelled – despite scandals ranging from council property unfit for human habitation to £millions gone missing hitting the national headlines.

Criticising Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is considered a worse crime than cronyism and crass incompetence, which costs £millions and causes immeasurable misery.

Expect more bumbling and spluttering rubbish from Miliband today about energy windfall taxes to pay for things – sigh – when the government (OFGEM) can simply to just cut bills if they need to. (Note Labour’s windfall ‘tax’ doesn’t cover the difference by their own calculations.)

Yes – the power is already there and it doesn’t need to be paid for.

(They’re lowering the Cap BTW – but the subsidy will go so prices bills still going up – It’s a Tory sham of course but drivelling on about windfall tax is gush of the highest order.)

Also – ‘Fully costed’ illiteracy again! Labour front bench idiots assemble.

I wish I knew what this actually meant. After all, saying spending will be funded by a Treasury overdraft with the Bank of England means that spending is both costed and funded so what does @RachelReevesMP actually mean by saying this because I bet it isn’t that. https://t.co/tJySaigvk4

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) February 26, 2023

She *thinks* the private sector must pay for the public sector! LMFAO. Does the private sector have a secret printing machine; which the monopoly issuer of the pound – HMG – doesn’t have access too? Surely that would be illegal if the private sector could just create money to lend the public sector.

FACT: all money that the private sector swaps for Government bonds – the National ‘debt’ – was created by government earlier in the cycle.

It’s ludicrous.

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2023%2F02%2F23%2Fjeremy-corbyn-never-friends-says-sir-keir-starmer%2F

telling ITV News: “He’s a colleague, he’s a friend and he’s led us through some really difficult times in the Labour Party.

That was just before Starmer became Labour leader. Then once he became leader:

However, asked by Jewish News three months later whether he would call Mr Corbyn a friend, Sir Keir replied: “No.”

The inconsistency and lies (never the lack of integrity involved in stabbing in the back someone you have publicly called a friend) might be easily ignored and brushed under the carpet now, but it will be much harder when as Prime Minister he will be under the spotlight and held to account.

Interesting times ahead imo.

Yeah I saw this – Starmer’s mission just gets more ruthless without focus on the things that matter

Have you seen the Broxtowe job?

https://twitter.com/broxtowelabour/status/1630607834458079255?t=SHRFm-WrWXnv6noQfjCg_w&s=19

Democracy and current Labour are two different things.

If it still says Democratic Socialist on the membership card … It should say Corporate Tory Baby Party

This is not a good interview given by Starmer this morning:

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/sir-keir-starmer-sue-gray-chief-of-staff-refuses-to-say/

He might well be totally correct when he says that nothing “improper” occurred.

In which case why the **** does he look so incredibly uncomfortable and repeatedly tries to deflect the question with nonsense like “I met her when I was Director of Public Prosecution”?

He is clearly squirming in that interview which doesn’t look good for someone who has nothing to hide.

Voters are understandably cynical and distrustful of the honesty of politicians, Starmer needs to answer direct questions with direct answers and if he can’t manage that learn not to sound like a bullshitting schoolboy.

He obviously needs to go shopping for an image consultant as well as a chief of staff.

I heard that – I couldn’t work out why it was so difficult for him to answer the question.

I think Sir K is dancing on a pinhead for a couple of possible reasons:

1. He’s repeatedly stressed he had no contact with Sue Gray “during” her inquiry. Which naturally begs the question – what contact did he or members of his team have with her before, during and after?

2. He has declined to share his own messages with Sue Gray whilst regularly calling for messages between ministers to be revealed. Why?

3. The Civil Service Code of Conduct specifically prohibits all contact between civil servants and members of HM’s Opposition unless the contact is specifically authorised * in advance * by the relevant Dept Minister. He has obfuscated whether Sue Gray requested or received that permission before discussing the CoS role with him.

Either way, the apparent obfuscation is noticeable – not just his own but also refusing to address whether Sue Gray herself stuck to the Civil Service rules that we would have been well aware of. And as others have said – it’s just another own goal from someone who trades on his “laser” like attention to detail and integrity.

And then there’s the curious matter of Rupa Huq, who was quietly re-admitted to Labour last week even though Starmer himself said her recent comments on Kwasi Kwarteng were in his view “racist” and has repeatedly pledged to drive out racism from his party.

He’s not even in power (yet) but seems to making exactly the same errors of judgement he criticises in others.

Seems the epitome of a westminster bubble story

Tories must be desperate if this is all they have in the midst of a cost of living crisis & a 20pt poll deficit

Sunak seems to be silent on this, he knows if they block Grays appointment they look petty & desperate

Its only really the Johnsonian outriders that are pushing this, they see it as a way to weaken the case against Johnson re partygate

Tories must be desperate if this is all they have in the midst of a cost of living crisis & a 20pt poll deficit

No one party seems to give a stuff about the cost of living in my opinion.

This whole short term manoeuvring around a huge looming problem is pretty daft – economically.

But then again most folk around seem to be concerned with potholes… go figure.

Its only really the Johnsonian outriders that are pushing this, they see it as a way to weaken the case against Johnson re partygate

Since Acoba also applies to ministers the brighter ones should getting a tad nervous about demanding it actually starts having some real enforcement capability.

Trouble is, most of labours attacks on the tories over the past few years haven’t been policy but instead attacking their character and honesty. A large part of their strategy just seems to be that we will just do the same things better with more integrity. SKS has made “Westminster bubble” politics his major attack line, and when their is even the appearance of throwing stones in glass houses, it is frankly embarrassing

He should have been offering an alternative legislative direction, and highlighting that tory policy, that is against the interest of the majority, is borne from their attitude of entitlement and greed as demonstrated by partygate and cronyism, instead of pushing them to the front and policy to the back.

Labour is constantly challenging the government on policy. You’re not following politics very closely if you think otherwise. The reason that the character of government members is coming to the forefront of public debate is two fold… most people are voting for people to govern for them, not just represent then, and that means the character and decision making of politicians is as important as any individual policy signposted up front that might not survive contact with real world events (Covid and Russian invasions being key recent events that show that clearly)… and in addition, many members of this government have so clearly shown themselves to be unsuitable for government and in it for what they can get that it’s hard for people to not point, stare, and shake their heads at them. Repeatedly.

Seems the epitome of a westminster bubble story

…if this is all they have …

Tory supporters might say that about partygate.

“When did you first approach Sue Gray to be your Chief of Staff” was a perfectly legitimate question for Nick Ferrari to ask and for Starmer to answer.

It is something which voters, outside the “Westminster Bubble”, might well want to know the answer to. After all Sue Gray is responsible for a report which is highly critical of a PM, it is therefore perfectly reasonable to ask when was she first approached by the Opposition to work for them.

What is wrong with that?

If Starmer doesn’t know the answer he should explain why. If he does know the answer but refuses to give it he should also explain why that is.

This is hardly a question which will have been sprung unexpected on him, it’s been in the news for days, why does he seem so unprepared?

Saying “I met her when I was Director of Public Prosecution” is clearly not an acceptable answer as it has nothing to do with the question – would you accept avoiding questions like that from a Tory politician?

As MSP points out lack of integrity, and lack of straightforward honesty, has been central to Labour’s attacks on the Tories, rather than policy. So it doesn’t look good when the leader of the Labour Party is clearly squirming, looks anything but relaxed, and refuses to answer a direct question without giving any sort of explanation.

Labour is constantly challenging the government on policy. You’re not following politics very closely if you think otherwise.

Along with the majority of voters then. Most people do not know how Labour’s policies on the economy, health, international relations, transport, education, social services, wages, etc differentiate from those of the Tory Party, but they are fully aware of Labour’s criticism of Tory lack of integrity and honesty.

It is clear that Labour’s attacks on the Tories has not focused on policy. In fact Keir Starmer even proudly announced that he had “wiped the slate clean” and would come up with policies before the next general election.

Indeed you supported that strategy yourself Kelvin saying that the general election was too far away to worry about policy, apparently, according to you, Labour only needed to come up with policies to put to the electorate when the general election campaign kicked off.

It is something which voters, outside the “Westminster Bubble”, might well want to know the answer to.

Really?

You’re comparing over 100 fines for breaking lockdown in downing St, during which the rest of us were unable to see relatives, friends or go to the pub

With some tedious details of what the policy was on when you can move to another job?

I’m sure starmer will look silly if gray did break the rules (and it’s gray, not starmer that would have done)

But I don’t see how it moves the dial on much of anything

It’s even in danger of rumbling on to overshadow Hunts budget and extending fuel help, which would be funny as that’s a policy that actually effects peoples lives

Labour is constantly challenging the government on policy. You’re not following politics very closely if you think otherwise

You don’t need to follow closely to know that is simply not true.

Indeed you supported that strategy yourself Kelvin saying that the general election was too far away to worry about policy, apparently, according to you, Labour only needed to come up with policies to put to the electorate when the general election campaign kicked off.

Well yeah, exactly. How many times have you reminded us the policies will come … at some point.

The policies keep coming from Labour. They don’t make up a full manifesto yet, and won’t do ’till an election, but we already know more about what Labour plan to do, and how, than we did about either May or Johnson’s governments’ polices when those two won their elections. And Starmer has been clearer than Truss or Sunak across a whole range of policy briefs… yet both of them got to be PM and make everything up on the hoof without even asking for our votes, never mind explaining to us their plans or detailing their policies. What’s Suank’s? “Reduce inflation” (that everyone predicts will fall without/despite his interventions). Great. Just an excuse to pay lower wages.

Really?

You’re comparing over 100 fines for breaking lockdown in downing St, during which the rest of us were unable to see relatives, friends or go to the pub

With some tedious details of what the policy was on when you can move to another job?

Well very obviously I am not. It is the “no one is interested in this” attitude.

You dismiss it as “tedious detail”. It’s not, it is a perfectly reasonable question to ask, with no obvious reason not to answer it. In fact by squirming and avoiding giving an answer Starmer simply added more interest in the story.

If Starmer had answered on “the 15th January”, for example, we wouldn’t be discussing it now, it would have been put to bed.

People are entitled to be reassured that Sue Gray wasn’t approached by the Opposition whilst she was investigating the behaviour of a PM, there is nothing strange in that.

‘Long term plans for growth,’ ‘partnerships with business,’ failure to support striking workers makes fairly clear that the policies will be more austerity, trickle down nonsense and jam tomorrow.

People are entitled to be reassured that Sue Gray wasn’t approached by the Opposition whilst she was investigating the behaviour of a PM, there is nothing strange in that.

A quick note here. Sue Gray didn’t investigate the behaviour of the PM, she compiled a report that published submissions from her colleagues about what went on in those offices. The Tories are free to stand up and point out anything incorrect or wrong about what she published, or if it was incomplete or selectively edited they can expand and add to it. As for the gap between what Johnson said in parliament, and what he actually did… there is an enquiry they can make submissions to. If Johnson want’s to set the record straight, he has a golden opportunity to do so at that enquiry. Sue Gray wasn’t a judge handing down a sentence on Johnson, she was just a civil servant delivering a pretty dry report on what she was told by her co-workers… at his request (not his first choice, but we know why that was).