Everyone’s too busy arguing about previous Labour leaders and trying to out do each other with pedantry

Mostly down to one of Starmers cult members desperately trying to divert attention away from Starmer had accepted an ERG extremist who even the tories thought was borderline into the party.

Regarding his speech it was a bit of a damp squib. Not really worth the reputational damage to have the ERG extremist introduce it in my opinion.

Overall it was vague. I cant say I am a fan of his proposal of copying and pasting some of the counter terrorism laws for anti people smuggling. Those are laws which really need review not extending to other area.

I give up.  One or two of you really need to take your heads out of your own fundaments and actually read stuff or listen to stuff.

I read stuff and listen to stuff but we must be hearing different things.  What things has Starmer said so far that are really great for you?   (You obviously can’t count his half decent pledges from a few years back!)

As others has said the Rwanda policy should be a 100% given that Labour would immediately scrap it, just like they should state they would immediately scrap the recent hit the sick and disabled crap the tories were touting.

The problem is that he doesn’t show any integrity in case he loses some points in the polls.  Yes, politics is difficult as tories would just say he has no plan because he doesn’t like their plan but as a potential PM he should be up to handling that while retaining integrity, i.e. my ‘plan’ for immigration would be to get the asylum process actually working to a point where there is pretty much no backlog with all claims dealt with in a month so no need for mass retention.  The money to implement would come from the much lower current costs of holding people for 18 months.  May be very difficult to implement but that is my plan as a response to knocking the Rwanda plan.

And so as we are about enter a new week the media coverage still keeps rumbling on, and not in a very positive way. From today’s Guardian:

Labour MPs are wondering if they will have to clap Elphicke at the next meeting of the parliamentary party, as is usually the case with new arrivals. “Slow-clapped is more probable,” said one MP.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/12/natalie-elphicke-defection-labour-kier-starmer-dover-mp

Nicely summed up here:

The Tories were milking Labour’s discomfort. One former cabinet minister said: “Natalie has earned her place in history by being the only defector ever to cause more embarrassment to the party she defected to than to the one she left.”

Rishi Sunak must be breathing sighs of relief that she didn’t do serious damage to the Tories by joining Reform UK.

Why didn’t she join Reform, would look like a much better fit than Labour – guess she wanted the attention where who low morals would be notable rather than just being pretty average in Reform.

Maybe sublime skullduggery at work here, she wanted to damage both parties. And did.

I suspect that although she is being touted as an “unpaid” housing advisor to Starmer personal financial reward was likely the driving factor.

All the evidence is that after the general election she will derive her income from that sector, having easy access to non-hostile government ministers will possibly prove rather useful. Before she became an MP she was doing work for the government, she is obviously aware that the next government will be a Labour government.

Funny how Robert Buckland suddenly remembers her trying to corrupt the judicial process four years ago. Must have been some kind of flashback induced by the trauma of seeing her cross the floor.

The spectacle of Labour having to issue a denial on behalf of the far-right MP for Dover for trying to influence a sex offences trial involving the previous Conservative MP for Dover is quite entertaining though.

I suspect it’s now gone a little beyond the one-day PR victory SKS was envisaging. Perhaps if his next defector could have a little less dirty laundry to bring across, that would be nice.

As Grace Blakeley said on QT – literally letting the Tories in.

Funny how Robert Buckland suddenly remembers her trying to corrupt the judicial process four years ago.

Perhaps the sight of a former Dictator of Public Prosecutions welcoming and defending a far-right politician who tried to nobble a judge jolted his memory?

What’s also funny is that Sir Keir Starmer appears to have such a short memory that he didn’t seem to have remembered why Natalie Elphicke was suspended from the House of Commons.

Hey James O’Brien called it a genius move – looks totally regressive to me.

More than half the guardian comments section is in tatters.

Elphicke is just trying to do as much damage as possible to the Tories and Labour in her spiteful farewell to parliament.

Starmer should have told her to do one and at least hold onto a scrap of moral high ground. Elphicke will not be tomorrow’s chip paper because she’s not the type to go quietly. She will continue to do damage (more to Starmer than Sunak) for as long as she sits as a MP.

This is a huge error by Starmer.

Agree, struggling to see any upside to Labour here and waiting on the ‘new information has come to light’ suspension and back track

All the evidence is that after the general election she will derive her income from that sector, having easy access to non-hostile government ministers will possibly prove rather useful. Before she became an MP she was doing work for the government, she is obviously aware that the next government will be a Labour government.

Most plausible explanation by far.

She would have done Sunak more damage by defecting to Reform UK.

In the last year support for Labour has more or less remained stable but the Labour lead has slowly increased because the Tories have hemorrhaged votes to Reform UK. Support for Reform UK has more than double in the last year.

Labour has taken about as many votes from the Tories as is reasonably possible, they can’t realistically take much more. Reform UK on the other hand can.

With Elphicke defecting to Labour Sunak was able to do what everyone else has done – shrug his shoulders and dismiss as bizarre and illogical because she has nothing in common with Labour.

A defection to Reform UK would have been a huge problem for Sunak because it is seen by many as the natural home for disaffected right-wing Tories, Elphicke’s defection would have simply fed that narrative and encouraged others to follow suit.

The problem for Elphicke is that Reform UK won’t be forming the next government, Labour will be.

When you add up all the different sections of society he’s pissed off you do wonder what he imagines his constituency to be.

This feels pretty signifcant

not just because it shows that elphicke has definitely crossed the floor, but also that Sunak is losing control of parliament

Natalie Elphicke, who defected from Tories last week, voted for Labour amendment, won by majority of just one. Let’s see whether that helps improve relations with Labour women MPs. pic.twitter.com/6H2i3ANB9U

— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) May 13, 2024

This feels pretty signifcant

Other tories also voted for it without crossing the floor and damaging labours reputation. So not really significant at all. But I am sure some still want to believe welcoming such a vile politician into labour is a sign of SKS’s tactical genius.

Yup, I don’t think there is anything significant about the new far-right Labour MP voting with the majority in what was a free vote.

Especially as it comes days after she was forced to publicly apologise for attempting to justify the sex crimes of a former MP.

One time Tory Party Leader Theresa May also managed to vote for the Labour/LibDem amendment. She remains a Conservative MP.

That is was a free vote not whipped surely makes it more significant & the 8 Tory MPs that voted against the government on this are all considered  to the left* of elphicke/ wets by the frothing hard right that are driving the Tories currently!

It doesnt stop her being a horrible woman, but shows she now has to vote very differently and its certainly helping destabilise the tories even more, Ill bet she’s off the CCHQ xmas card list

Who wouldn't want victims of serious sexual offences protected in the workplace?
The Tory MP for Stoke South Jack Brereton wouldn't.
Come on Stoke South get him out! https://t.co/7SYgAGL3BW#BreretonOut #ToriesOut677 #GeneralElectionNow pic.twitter.com/ph8hRhGsU9

— The Rev. Anton Mittens 🌹👮🎓 (@MittensOff) May 14, 2024

*Im aware that everyone is to the left of her!

First Steps ….. Right, Left, Right, Left, Right, Left

Carving that on a rock’s not going to cut it, I want to see it tattooed on his face, that might stop him uturning on it all

“First Steps ….. Right, Left, Right, Left, Right, Left “

Remember David Blunkett as Home Secretary? Gengis Khan would have thought some of Davids policies were going a bit too far.

The question SKS is going to struggle with soon (that’s already been put in a few places) is How Come Natalie Elphicke is an acceptable member of the Labour party, but Diane Abbot has had the whip withdrawn for over a year now?

They will soon start to run the risk of undermining some core support, if they lurch too far rightwards and keep refusing to make any space for those to the left with a long history in the party…

That ship has already sailed.

Haven’t we had a list of stuff before?

Yeah okay.

(Plus GB energy is one hollowed out around the houses construct. )

It’s all getting a bit not worth looking at these days.

Economic stability is not a clear aim.  Not sure it can be measured or makes any sense in isolation. Besides whatever economic stability does mean – it won’t create any new money to spend.

Starmer is so lazy in his lazy-focussed approach. And no – boring isn’t necessarily good.

Why TF did Labour abstain?

I’m pretty sure even the Tories and right-wingers they’re trying to scoop up in the election don’t want shit in their water

What are you playing at @Keir_Starmer and @UKLabour? https://t.co/fe73RXadUC

— Marina Purkiss (@MarinaPurkiss) May 16, 2024

Oh well.

In my mob there’s people involved in recruitment to teaching and inspection and the situation is dire, particularly in the more deprived areas. How does he think he’s going to recruit 6,500  extra teachers who are any good without upping the salary and status of the profession? ‘Secureconomics’ will guarantee that doesn’t happen.

In my mob there’s people involved in recruitment to teaching and inspection and the situation is dire, particularly in the more deprived areas.

My partner says the same – as a Teacher.

Starmer explaining how he’s going to nationalise the water industry to dermot o’leary whilst simultaneously making tandoori kebabs and keeping up the bantz on Sunday Brunch atm is very Partridge