Stop voting for fucking Tories

[tabascoboy]

Well a few days after stating to the House in PMQ that Zahawi "had addressed the matter in full

[Slick]

Yes. if this is the case, it's utterly outrageous

Indeed - it does seem the most likely scenario.

The levels of malfeasance in office with this mob are genuinely absurd and I don't think the opposition have it in them to stop the rot, let alone excise it. Sure, they should get into power at the next election but at this point I want a Labour party that is going hell for leather on fixing the rotten heart of government and ensuring that all the codes of practice that have been run roughshod over are revisited, strengthened, and enforced - no matter who's in power. But then that'd require Starmer and co to do something other than just beat the drum that the Tories aren't enacting their own policies properly so Labour will do them better(!)

The baffling bit to me is how we have arrived at a position that a minister caught evading tax - I'll call it evading as it's obviously deliberate - doesn't result in his own party hanging him out to dry and distancing themselves from him ASAP.

Politics has always been an area full of chancers and the corruptable but it used to be that once you were caught, you resigned or were quickly disposed of. Where did that go?

Starmer is still fighting his own battles within his party to keep the full blown loons under control which I suspects limits him. It may be that he is this generation's Neil Kinnock - the chap who clears out the crud to leave a clear run at government for somebody else.

I hadn't thought of this but it does seem to be going that way. Are there any young things even looking mildly good enough in the ranks though? particularly before the next election.

[tabascoboy]

Hard to understand why Sunak hasn't sacked him already

[I like neeps]

Indeed - it does seem the most likely scenario.

The levels of malfeasance in office with this mob are genuinely absurd and I don't think the opposition have it in them to stop the rot, let alone excise it. Sure, they should get into power at the next election but at this point I want a Labour party that is going hell for leather on fixing the rotten heart of government and ensuring that all the codes of practice that have been run roughshod over are revisited, strengthened, and enforced - no matter who's in power. But then that'd require Starmer and co to do something other than just beat the drum that the Tories aren't enacting their own policies properly so Labour will do them better(!)

The baffling bit to me is how we have arrived at a position that a minister caught evading tax - I'll call it evading as it's obviously deliberate - doesn't result in his own party hanging him out to dry and distancing themselves from him ASAP.

Politics has always been an area full of chancers and the corruptable but it used to be that once you were caught, you resigned or were quickly disposed of. Where did that go?

Starmer is still fighting his own battles within his party to keep the full blown loons under control which I suspects limits him. It may be that he is this generation's Neil Kinnock - the chap who clears out the crud to leave a clear run at government for somebody else.

I hadn't thought of this but it does seem to be going that way. Are there any young things even looking mildly good enough in the ranks though? particularly before the next election.

Not really true, he doesn't have to deal with anyone and has had complete control of labour for c 2 years now. Starmer having no vision, breaking all his promises and being completely lacking in ideas or charisma really has nothing to do with anyone apart from himself. And if he can't beat a government that is actively harmful in that they're making the economy and public services far worse and being outright corrupt in doing so it is he and his acolytes that should be binned post haste.

Fwiw I think he'll win the next election but achieve nothing in power and lose after 5 years. But they won't corrupt which is a nice change of pace.

[C69]

Indeed - it does seem the most likely scenario.

The levels of malfeasance in office with this mob are genuinely absurd and I don't think the opposition have it in them to stop the rot, let alone excise it. Sure, they should get into power at the next election but at this point I want a Labour party that is going hell for leather on fixing the rotten heart of government and ensuring that all the codes of practice that have been run roughshod over are revisited, strengthened, and enforced - no matter who's in power. But then that'd require Starmer and co to do something other than just beat the drum that the Tories aren't enacting their own policies properly so Labour will do them better(!)

The baffling bit to me is how we have arrived at a position that a minister caught evading tax - I'll call it evading as it's obviously deliberate - doesn't result in his own party hanging him out to dry and distancing themselves from him ASAP.

Politics has always been an area full of chancers and the corruptable but it used to be that once you were caught, you resigned or were quickly disposed of. Where did that go?

Starmer is still fighting his own battles within his party to keep the full blown loons under control which I suspects limits him. It may be that he is this generation's Neil Kinnock - the chap who clears out the crud to leave a clear run at government for somebody else.

I hadn't thought of this but it does seem to be going that way. Are there any young things even looking mildly good enough in the ranks though? particularly before the next election.

What battles is he having?
He seems to have purged his party of any serious dissent, whilst the Tories are at war with each other on multiple fronts.

[Biffer]

The baffling bit to me is how we have arrived at a position that a minister caught evading tax - I'll call it evading as it's obviously deliberate - doesn't result in his own party hanging him out to dry and distancing themselves from him ASAP.

Politics has always been an area full of chancers and the corruptable but it used to be that once you were caught, you resigned or were quickly disposed of. Where did that go?

Starmer is still fighting his own battles within his party to keep the full blown loons under control which I suspects limits him. It may be that he is this generation's Neil Kinnock - the chap who clears out the crud to leave a clear run at government for somebody else.

I hadn't thought of this but it does seem to be going that way. Are there any young things even looking mildly good enough in the ranks though? particularly before the next election.

Not really true, he doesn't have to deal with anyone and has had complete control of labour for c 2 years now. Starmer having no vision, breaking all his promises and being completely lacking in ideas or charisma really has nothing to do with anyone apart from himself. And if he can't beat a government that is actively harmful in that they're making the economy and public services far worse and being outright corrupt in doing so it is he and his acolytes that should be binned post haste.

Fwiw I think he'll win the next election but achieve nothing in power and lose after 5 years. But they won't corrupt which is a nice change of pace.

If he has five years of competence and the Tories eat each other alive, both of which are likely, he might end up with a second term, particularly if the first one is a huge landslide. But the consequences of leaving the EU will really be chewing the country up by that time, so that will have a big impact on elections.

[I like neeps]

I hadn't thought of this but it does seem to be going that way. Are there any young things even looking mildly good enough in the ranks though? particularly before the next election.

Not really true, he doesn't have to deal with anyone and has had complete control of labour for c 2 years now. Starmer having no vision, breaking all his promises and being completely lacking in ideas or charisma really has nothing to do with anyone apart from himself. And if he can't beat a government that is actively harmful in that they're making the economy and public services far worse and being outright corrupt in doing so it is he and his acolytes that should be binned post haste.

Fwiw I think he'll win the next election but achieve nothing in power and lose after 5 years. But they won't corrupt which is a nice change of pace.

If he has five years of competence and the Tories eat each other alive, both of which are likely, he might end up with a second term, particularly if the first one is a huge landslide. But the consequences of leaving the EU will really be chewing the country up by that time, so that will have a big impact on elections.

The Tories are incompetent because firstly their current flagship policy Brexit is a disaster economically, secondly their last flagship policy Austerity was a disaster economically. And now public services don't have enough funding, tax rates on income are high so you can't raise them so have to go for your voters wallets which they won't do so they're f*cked.

So Keir Starmer is either going to have to go after the asset owners or corporations to raise the cash needed for public services. He isn't saying anything about that (not that you can believe what he says anyway) but is basically we'll be better at spending not enough money than the conservatives because there's no money to spend. So if he won't diagnose the problem how is he going to fix it?

Fixing the NHS requires vast sums of money for social care, that's before you get to frontline staff. And a massive billion pound organisation needs administrators and managers. All of whom Starmer is in favour reforming out.

In trying to look tough to the union he just looks like a conservative. It's no surprise he's trying to hugely increase funding from private enterprise and high net worth individuals. Because the members and union cash is leaving. And what about when they start to ask him for what he paid for? The Labour party doesn't stand up for labour, doesn't stand for anything except power and even that what's he going to do with it?. He's going be a dreadful PM.

[Biffer]

Not really true, he doesn't have to deal with anyone and has had complete control of labour for c 2 years now. Starmer having no vision, breaking all his promises and being completely lacking in ideas or charisma really has nothing to do with anyone apart from himself. And if he can't beat a government that is actively harmful in that they're making the economy and public services far worse and being outright corrupt in doing so it is he and his acolytes that should be binned post haste.

Fwiw I think he'll win the next election but achieve nothing in power and lose after 5 years. But they won't corrupt which is a nice change of pace.

If he has five years of competence and the Tories eat each other alive, both of which are likely, he might end up with a second term, particularly if the first one is a huge landslide. But the consequences of leaving the EU will really be chewing the country up by that time, so that will have a big impact on elections.

The Tories are incompetent because firstly their current flagship policy Brexit is a disaster economically, secondly their last flagship policy Austerity was a disaster economically. And now public services don't have enough funding, tax rates on income are high so you can't raise them so have to go for your voters wallets which they won't do so they're f*cked.

So Keir Starmer is either going to have to go after the asset owners or corporations to raise the cash needed for public services. He isn't saying anything about that (not that you can believe what he says anyway) but is basically we'll be better at spending not enough money than the conservatives because there's no money to spend. So if he won't diagnose the problem how is he going to fix it?

Fixing the NHS requires vast sums of money for social care, that's before you get to frontline staff. And a massive billion pound organisation needs administrators and managers. All of whom Starmer is reforming out.

In trying to look tough to the union he just looks like a conservative. It's no surprise he's trying to hugely increase funding from private enterprise and high net worth individuals. Because the members and union cash is leaving. And what about when they start to ask him for what he paid for? He's going be a dreadful PM.

I'm not really disagreeing with that, but the bar for looking competent has now been set incredibly low.

[fishfoodie]

The baffling bit to me is how we have arrived at a position that a minister caught evading tax - I'll call it evading as it's obviously deliberate - doesn't result in his own party hanging him out to dry and distancing themselves from him ASAP.

Politics has always been an area full of chancers and the corruptable but it used to be that once you were caught, you resigned or were quickly disposed of. Where did that go?

Starmer is still fighting his own battles within his party to keep the full blown loons under control which I suspects limits him. It may be that he is this generation's Neil Kinnock - the chap who clears out the crud to leave a clear run at government for somebody else.

I hadn't thought of this but it does seem to be going that way. Are there any young things even looking mildly good enough in the ranks though? particularly before the next election.

Not really true, he doesn't have to deal with anyone and has had complete control of labour for c 2 years now. Starmer having no vision, breaking all his promises and being completely lacking in ideas or charisma really has nothing to do with anyone apart from himself. And if he can't beat a government that is actively harmful in that they're making the economy and public services far worse and being outright corrupt in doing so it is he and his acolytes that should be binned post haste.

Fwiw I think he'll win the next election but achieve nothing in power and lose after 5 years. But they won't corrupt which is a nice change of pace.

I don't think any Labour leader has ever had complete control; there are always those agitating for the Leader to be more Socialist, or more Centrist.

Starmer has only recently had to deal with MPs & even Shadow Cabinet members turning up on picket lines, despite being explicitly told not to give the red tops that photo op.

[JM2K6]

The wanking on about Starmer being a liar or breaking election promises is really tiresome. Most of it - not all - just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny. The problem is the policies he does talk about.

Take the pledge that everyone was howling about last year:

5. Common ownership

Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.

The problem? Starmer and others backed away from renationalising rail. On the face of it, that's an easy one to mark as a broken promise. But the turnabout was because putting ideology ahead of financial reality was a fucking stupid idea. Thanks to the Tories, and thanks to Covid, it would be suicidally ruinous to commit to renationalising the rail companies before we get the economy back into a position where the government can take over this kind of responsibility. That's not an evil mastermind pulling the wool over everyone's eyes, that's an honest appraisal of how much of a financial basket case this country is in and will be in when Labour are in a position to do something about it.

2019 was a long time ago. The reality has changed.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Starmer is still fighting his own battles within his party to keep the full blown loons under control which I suspects limits him. It may be that he is this generation's Neil Kinnock - the chap who clears out the crud to leave a clear run at government for somebody else.

The bone Blair threw the left so they'd leave him alone was fox hunting, and thus we saw a shitload of parliamentary time given over to fox hunting rather than looking at the Lords, education, food standards...

So what's odd in this is Starmer could throw the left the bone of really going after conflicts of interest, probity in government, the civil service and NGOs, tax avoidance and tax evasion..., and dress it up as being popular on the back of austerity, and there's a lot for the left to get quit excited about in all that. And yet he's not, either because he flat out doesn't want to, or it's just part of the wider gambit to say nothing but the Tories are rubbish and it's time for Labour. If he doesn't want to it might be more he doesn't want the time it might subsume when there are other things to address, but unless he ever wants to say what those are it's a free shot on him as things stand

[I like neeps]

The wanking on about Starmer being a liar or breaking election promises is really tiresome. Most of it - not all - just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny. The problem is the policies he does talk about.

Take the pledge that everyone was howling about last year:

5. Common ownership

Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.

The problem? Starmer and others backed away from renationalising rail. On the face of it, that's an easy one to mark as a broken promise. But the turnabout was because putting ideology ahead of financial reality was a fucking stupid idea. Thanks to the Tories, and thanks to Covid, it would be suicidally ruinous to commit to renationalising the rail companies before we get the economy back into a position where the government can take over this kind of responsibility. That's not an evil mastermind pulling the wool over everyone's eyes, that's an honest appraisal of how much of a financial basket case this country is in and will be in when Labour are in a position to do something about it.

2019 was a long time ago. The reality has changed.

Rail... water... energy.... Him and Wes Streeting have been telling everyone who will listen the private sector has a big part to play in the NHS recently so let's assume he's not kept any of his four. So not "just rail".

And then there's the other 9 pledges he's also rowed back on. The right wing press are starting to attack him for it which I'm not sure is the right move for them making him seem not an out of control socialist which people dislike more than a liar.

But don't be mistaken, the reason people think Starmer is a liar is because Starmer is a liar.

[I like neeps]

I hadn't thought of this but it does seem to be going that way. Are there any young things even looking mildly good enough in the ranks though? particularly before the next election.

Not really true, he doesn't have to deal with anyone and has had complete control of labour for c 2 years now. Starmer having no vision, breaking all his promises and being completely lacking in ideas or charisma really has nothing to do with anyone apart from himself. And if he can't beat a government that is actively harmful in that they're making the economy and public services far worse and being outright corrupt in doing so it is he and his acolytes that should be binned post haste.

Fwiw I think he'll win the next election but achieve nothing in power and lose after 5 years. But they won't corrupt which is a nice change of pace.

I don't think any Labour leader has ever had complete control; there are always those agitating for the Leader to be more Socialist, or more Centrist.

Starmer has only recently had to deal with MPs & even Shadow Cabinet members turning up on picket lines, despite being explicitly told not to give the red tops that photo op.

I mean that will happen in all parties. Tories have even less control of the party and currently so much more dissent than Labour. They're planning to oust Sunak for Johnson as we type. To say I won't vote for a disunited Labour and will have to vote Tory would be just crazy.

[C69]

The wanking on about Starmer being a liar or breaking election promises is really tiresome. Most of it - not all - just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny. The problem is the policies he does talk about.

Take the pledge that everyone was howling about last year:

5. Common ownership

Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.

The problem? Starmer and others backed away from renationalising rail. On the face of it, that's an easy one to mark as a broken promise. But the turnabout was because putting ideology ahead of financial reality was a fucking stupid idea. Thanks to the Tories, and thanks to Covid, it would be suicidally ruinous to commit to renationalising the rail companies before we get the economy back into a position where the government can take over this kind of responsibility. That's not an evil mastermind pulling the wool over everyone's eyes, that's an honest appraisal of how much of a financial basket case this country is in and will be in when Labour are in a position to do something about it.

2019 was a long time ago. The reality has changed.

Rail... water... energy.... Him and Wes Streeting have been telling everyone who will listen the private sector has a big part to play in the NHS recently so let's assume he's not kept any of his four. So not "just rail".

And then there's the other 9 pledges he's also rowed back on. The right wing press are starting to attack him for it which I'm not sure is the right move for them making him seem not an out of control socialist which people dislike more than a liar.

But don't be mistaken, the reason people think Starmer is a liar is because Starmer is a liar.

Changing policy based upon the financial reality to reflect the chaos the Tories have caused rather than ploughing on regardless?
Ffs it's the sensible thing to do.
I dislike Starmer and his team but FFS the world is a different place after Covid and the Truss shit storm.

[JM2K6]

The wanking on about Starmer being a liar or breaking election promises is really tiresome. Most of it - not all - just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny. The problem is the policies he does talk about.

Take the pledge that everyone was howling about last year:

5. Common ownership

Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.

The problem? Starmer and others backed away from renationalising rail. On the face of it, that's an easy one to mark as a broken promise. But the turnabout was because putting ideology ahead of financial reality was a fucking stupid idea. Thanks to the Tories, and thanks to Covid, it would be suicidally ruinous to commit to renationalising the rail companies before we get the economy back into a position where the government can take over this kind of responsibility. That's not an evil mastermind pulling the wool over everyone's eyes, that's an honest appraisal of how much of a financial basket case this country is in and will be in when Labour are in a position to do something about it.

2019 was a long time ago. The reality has changed.

Rail... water... energy.... Him and Wes Streeting have been telling everyone who will listen the private sector has a big part to play in the NHS recently so let's assume he's not kept any of his four. So not "just rail".

And then there's the other 9 pledges he's also rowed back on. The right wing press are starting to attack him for it which I'm not sure is the right move for them making him seem not an out of control socialist which people dislike more than a liar.

But don't be mistaken, the reason people think Starmer is a liar is because Starmer is a liar.

It doesn't matter if it's rail or water or whoever. The money won't be there. It's braindead to tie yourself into committing to self-harm.

The other 9 pledges being "broken" are largely even thinner. There's a couple where you can point to it being a potential betrayal and I back the criticism. There's no "all 10 pledges have been broken" discussion that isn't ridiculous bad faith arguments from terminally online people who see no issue with the garbage coming out of Skwakbox and co.

[Biffer]

There's not a lot of point in an opposition party making firm commitments for an election in two years time right now.

[tabascoboy]

There's not a lot of point in an opposition party making firm commitments for an election in two years time right now.

Certainly an element of truth in saying "we can't make commitments now because we have no idea just how much the current shower of shite are going to make even more of a bollocks of running the country"

Has to be expressed slightly less crudely though, I'll grant

[I like neeps]

The wanking on about Starmer being a liar or breaking election promises is really tiresome. Most of it - not all - just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny. The problem is the policies he does talk about.

Take the pledge that everyone was howling about last year:



The problem? Starmer and others backed away from renationalising rail. On the face of it, that's an easy one to mark as a broken promise. But the turnabout was because putting ideology ahead of financial reality was a fucking stupid idea. Thanks to the Tories, and thanks to Covid, it would be suicidally ruinous to commit to renationalising the rail companies before we get the economy back into a position where the government can take over this kind of responsibility. That's not an evil mastermind pulling the wool over everyone's eyes, that's an honest appraisal of how much of a financial basket case this country is in and will be in when Labour are in a position to do something about it.

2019 was a long time ago. The reality has changed.

Rail... water... energy.... Him and Wes Streeting have been telling everyone who will listen the private sector has a big part to play in the NHS recently so let's assume he's not kept any of his four. So not "just rail".

And then there's the other 9 pledges he's also rowed back on. The right wing press are starting to attack him for it which I'm not sure is the right move for them making him seem not an out of control socialist which people dislike more than a liar.

But don't be mistaken, the reason people think Starmer is a liar is because Starmer is a liar.

It doesn't matter if it's rail or water or whoever. The money won't be there. It's braindead to tie yourself into committing to self-harm.

The other 9 pledges being "broken" are largely even thinner. There's a couple where you can point to it being a potential betrayal and I back the criticism. There's no "all 10 pledges have been broken" discussion that isn't ridiculous bad faith arguments from terminally online people who see no issue with the garbage coming out of Skwakbox and co.

No point in making the pledge in the first place. Renationalisation was always going to be ruinously expensive. He didn't follow through because he didn't believe it from the start.

Same with his believes on Brexit included in those pledges, polling shows most know it's awful now but he won't say a word.

Same with his supporting trade unions, he won't do it now because he's scared of the press response. Won't stand up for it.

Starmer isn't honest and lacks principles beyond I'll be sensible in charge. Cash needs to be spend, brexit needs to be rowed back on. It's time he is honest. Or not, and hope doing/saying nothing will win because the Tories are such a mess.

[dpedin]

Rail... water... energy.... Him and Wes Streeting have been telling everyone who will listen the private sector has a big part to play in the NHS recently so let's assume he's not kept any of his four. So not "just rail".

And then there's the other 9 pledges he's also rowed back on. The right wing press are starting to attack him for it which I'm not sure is the right move for them making him seem not an out of control socialist which people dislike more than a liar.

But don't be mistaken, the reason people think Starmer is a liar is because Starmer is a liar.

It doesn't matter if it's rail or water or whoever. The money won't be there. It's braindead to tie yourself into committing to self-harm.

The other 9 pledges being "broken" are largely even thinner. There's a couple where you can point to it being a potential betrayal and I back the criticism. There's no "all 10 pledges have been broken" discussion that isn't ridiculous bad faith arguments from terminally online people who see no issue with the garbage coming out of Skwakbox and co.

No point in making the pledge in the first place. Renationalisation was always going to be ruinously expensive. He didn't follow through because he didn't believe it from the start.

Same with his believes on Brexit included in those pledges, polling shows most know it's awful now but he won't say a word.

Same with his supporting trade unions, he won't do it now because he's scared of the press response. Won't stand up for it.

Starmer isn't honest and lacks principles beyond I'll be sensible in charge. Cash needs to be spend, brexit needs to be rowed back on. It's time he is honest. Or not, and hope doing/saying nothing will win because the Tories are such a mess.

Starmer and Labour don't want to scare the horses and don't want to give the Tories easy ammunition in the run up to the next election so he is deliberately aiming for the middle ground and is targeting specifically the swing seats and voters he needs to get over the line at the next GE. In particular with 75%+ of the media & press in the hands of right wing Tory supporting non-doms he really does have to avoid giving them anything substantial to target a la Corbyn. This does mean making some pretty shit decisions and seeming to gravitate to the right a bit more but it is all about getting the vote of about 5-10% of the voters in places like the red wall seats and marginal Tory seats. He won't make any ground in Scotland so isn't really bothered about us Scots, it really does come down to these swing voters. The messaging and the policies aren't aimed at existing die hard labour voters nor the small number of Scots who vote labour, it is about winning the next election pure and simply and that a means persuading middle England to vote for him. The level of detail and granularity the parties go into now to target votes is pretty scientific and pretty impressive and this drives the messaging. I am sure some of what he and Labour are having to do to win the next election sticks in the craw but that's politics folks, that's what it takes to win an election. To be honest I wouldn't care if he sold his granny to the devil if it meant getting into power and getting rid of these racist shysters of a Tory Gov asap.

[JM2K6]

Rail... water... energy.... Him and Wes Streeting have been telling everyone who will listen the private sector has a big part to play in the NHS recently so let's assume he's not kept any of his four. So not "just rail".

And then there's the other 9 pledges he's also rowed back on. The right wing press are starting to attack him for it which I'm not sure is the right move for them making him seem not an out of control socialist which people dislike more than a liar.

But don't be mistaken, the reason people think Starmer is a liar is because Starmer is a liar.

It doesn't matter if it's rail or water or whoever. The money won't be there. It's braindead to tie yourself into committing to self-harm.

The other 9 pledges being "broken" are largely even thinner. There's a couple where you can point to it being a potential betrayal and I back the criticism. There's no "all 10 pledges have been broken" discussion that isn't ridiculous bad faith arguments from terminally online people who see no issue with the garbage coming out of Skwakbox and co.

No point in making the pledge in the first place. Renationalisation was always going to be ruinously expensive. He didn't follow through because he didn't believe it from the start.

Come on, you cannot seriously be refusing to understand the difference between 2019 and now.

Same with his believes on Brexit included in those pledges, polling shows most know it's awful now but he won't say a word.

Brexit isn't in the pledges. The closest you get is the migrants' right stuff, which previously he's been fine on and very recently has said something entirely stupid that I completely disagree with.

Same with his supporting trade unions, he won't do it now because he's scared of the press response. Won't stand up for it.

Is this a joke? Aside from the picket line nonsense, it's been a consistent line from Starmer and his allies to be in support of trade unions.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ke ... 66050.html

https://www.bigissue.com/news/employmen ... to-strike/

https://www.impartialreporter.com/news/ ... t-workers/

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... d-disputes

Starmer isn't honest and lacks principles beyond I'll be sensible in charge. Cash needs to be spend, brexit needs to be rowed back on. It's time he is honest. Or not, and hope doing/saying nothing will win because the Tories are such a mess.

Rowing back on Brexit is hugely complicated and an absolute minefield that is probably the only thing standing between Labour and a washout of the Tories.

Starmer doesn't seem to be dishonest and doesn't seem to lack principles.

It seems very clear that he views it as being of the utmost importance that Labour get into power with a big majority so that they can enact real change. His problem is he's so laser focused on winning "back" Labour voters who voted Tory at the last election that he's leaning too far to pandering to them and ignoring the people who actually want to vote for Labour and who are more naturally in line with Labour's ideals, as well as anyone who didn't vote last time out (a huge number of people). I agree he's weak on a lot of stuff he should be much stronger on and much further left on. This doesn't make him dishonest. I also think he's too scared of the media and the whole "don't give them anything to use as ammo" is a dumbshit coward's choice because they'll make shit up anyway. Far better to give people something to believe in and win some voters rather than refuse to engage on hot topics.

And the biggest problem with the accusations of dishonesty are largely where they're coming from on social media. Disingenuous pricks with barely concealed agendas with paper thin arguments.

[SaintK]

It doesn't matter if it's rail or water or whoever. The money won't be there. It's braindead to tie yourself into committing to self-harm.

The other 9 pledges being "broken" are largely even thinner. There's a couple where you can point to it being a potential betrayal and I back the criticism. There's no "all 10 pledges have been broken" discussion that isn't ridiculous bad faith arguments from terminally online people who see no issue with the garbage coming out of Skwakbox and co.

No point in making the pledge in the first place. Renationalisation was always going to be ruinously expensive. He didn't follow through because he didn't believe it from the start.

Same with his believes on Brexit included in those pledges, polling shows most know it's awful now but he won't say a word.

Same with his supporting trade unions, he won't do it now because he's scared of the press response. Won't stand up for it.

Starmer isn't honest and lacks principles beyond I'll be sensible in charge. Cash needs to be spend, brexit needs to be rowed back on. It's time he is honest. Or not, and hope doing/saying nothing will win because the Tories are such a mess.

Starmer and Labour don't want to scare the horses and don't want to give the Tories easy ammunition in the run up to the next election so he is deliberately aiming for the middle ground and is targeting specifically the swing seats and voters he needs to get over the line at the next GE. In particular with 75%+ of the media & press in the hands of right wing Tory supporting non-doms he really does have to avoid giving them anything substantial to target a la Corbyn. This does mean making some pretty shit decisions and seeming to gravitate to the right a bit more but it is all about getting the vote of about 5-10% of the voters in places like the red wall seats and marginal Tory seats. He won't make any ground in Scotland so isn't really bothered about us Scots, it really does come down to these swing voters. The messaging and the policies aren't aimed at existing die hard labour voters nor the small number of Scots who vote labour, it is about winning the next election pure and simply and that a means persuading middle England to vote for him. The level of detail and granularity the parties go into now to target votes is pretty scientific and pretty impressive and this drives the messaging. I am sure some of what he and Labour are having to do to win the next election sticks in the craw but that's politics folks, that's what it takes to win an election. To be honest I wouldn't care if he sold his granny to the devil if it meant getting into power and getting rid of these racist shysters of a Tory Gov asap.

I don't support all Labour policies but for the first time in my life I will vote Labour in 50 years of voting. Starmer just needs to stick to his guns
I just want rid of these self-serving, entitled bastards currently in government at the next opportunity

[I like neeps]

It doesn't matter if it's rail or water or whoever. The money won't be there. It's braindead to tie yourself into committing to self-harm.

The other 9 pledges being "broken" are largely even thinner. There's a couple where you can point to it being a potential betrayal and I back the criticism. There's no "all 10 pledges have been broken" discussion that isn't ridiculous bad faith arguments from terminally online people who see no issue with the garbage coming out of Skwakbox and co.

No point in making the pledge in the first place. Renationalisation was always going to be ruinously expensive. He didn't follow through because he didn't believe it from the start.

Come on, you cannot seriously be refusing to understand the difference between 2019 and now.

Same with his believes on Brexit included in those pledges, polling shows most know it's awful now but he won't say a word.

Brexit isn't in the pledges. The closest you get is the migrants' right stuff, which previously he's been fine on and very recently has said something entirely stupid that I completely disagree with.

Same with his supporting trade unions, he won't do it now because he's scared of the press response. Won't stand up for it.

Is this a joke? Aside from the picket line nonsense, it's been a consistent line from Starmer and his allies to be in support of trade unions.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ke ... 66050.html

https://www.bigissue.com/news/employmen ... to-strike/

https://www.impartialreporter.com/news/ ... t-workers/

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... d-disputes

Starmer isn't honest and lacks principles beyond I'll be sensible in charge. Cash needs to be spend, brexit needs to be rowed back on. It's time he is honest. Or not, and hope doing/saying nothing will win because the Tories are such a mess.

Rowing back on Brexit is hugely complicated and an absolute minefield that is probably the only thing standing between Labour and a washout of the Tories.

Starmer doesn't seem to be dishonest and doesn't seem to lack principles.

It seems very clear that he views it as being of the utmost importance that Labour get into power with a big majority so that they can enact real change. His problem is he's so laser focused on winning "back" Labour voters who voted Tory at the last election that he's leaning too far to pandering to them and ignoring the people who actually want to vote for Labour and who are more naturally in line with Labour's ideals, as well as anyone who didn't vote last time out (a huge number of people). I agree he's weak on a lot of stuff he should be much stronger on and much further left on. This doesn't make him dishonest. I also think he's too scared of the media and the whole "don't give them anything to use as ammo" is a dumbshit coward's choice because they'll make shit up anyway. Far better to give people something to believe in and win some voters rather than refuse to engage on hot topics.

And the biggest problem with the accusations of dishonesty are largely where they're coming from on social media. Disingenuous pricks with barely concealed agendas with paper thin arguments.

So Starmer would reverse a law that makes it illegal for unions to call a strike? That's good of him. Very pro-union indeed. Doesn't support them when they strike but would reverse the most anti union law going, good-o!

Unpacking Brexit is complicated, but as shadow brexit secretary his policy was people's vote, as campaign for leader it was defend free movement, and now it's never say or do anything. What is his brexit policy these days? He's not said what it is and twice he's just abandoned campaigns. He doesn't believe in Brexit, we know that. He wants to ignore it because as you say the press will have a field day. But he was right brexit being bad and it's a massive issue in Britain whether we discuss it or not (NI still doesn't have an assembly). I don't know about you but I thought principles was standing up for what you believe in when it comes to live issues?

When you look at his actions as DPP there's really no evidence of who he claimed to be in his leadership election. Since election there really is not either. He pretended to be more left wing than he is to win the leadership and then has spent his time as LOTR as he spent his time in the CPS not being who he said he was. It's pretty obvious what you call that.

Starmer has no principles that have consistently guided his time as LOTR. Not one, what does he care most about? What does he standing for? Hard to know for even me who follows politics and subscribes to the new statesman. He's a damp squib. Hopefully he wins the next election but having someone who doesn't answer the questions that he's scared of even asking is bad news.

[JM2K6]

Brexit's happened. I loathe it, but it's the truth. That fight has been fought and lost.

The fact that you picked one of several points being made about the unions and pretended that was the sum total of Starmer's support for them is just silly. Come on.

When you look at his actions as DPP there's really no evidence of who he claimed to be in his leadership election. Since election there really is not either. He pretended to be more left wing than he is to win the leadership and then has spent his time as LOTR as he spent his time in the CPS not being who he said he was. It's pretty obvious what you call that.

Starmer has no principles that have consistently guided his time as LOTR.

This is garbled nonsense. No evidence of who he claimed to be in his actions as DPP? What? That's just word salad. What on earth is this based on?

p.s. I don't know what the LOTR is. Sorry.

[Mahoney]

p.s. I don't know what the LOTR is. Sorry.

He's been known as Mairon, Annatar, Artano, Aulendil, Gorthaur, Zigûr, and the Necromancer.

But mostly as Sauron.

[JM2K6]

p.s. I don't know what the LOTR is. Sorry.

He's been known as Mairon, Annatar, Artano, Aulendil, Gorthaur, Zigûr, and the Necromancer.

But mostly as Sauron.

Ai! Ai! Ai! A Tory!

[SaintK]

Move along, nothing to see here

A Conservative health minister has a substantial financial stake in a private health screening and Covid testing firm, raising questions about the potential for a conflict of interest.
Nick Markham, a businessman who was given a peerage under Liz Truss and appointed to the health department, owns about 30% of Cignpost Investments and has done so throughout his first four months in the job.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2 ... tments

[Lobby]

p.s. I don't know what the LOTR is. Sorry.

He's been known as Mairon, Annatar, Artano, Aulendil, Gorthaur, Zigûr, and the Necromancer.

But mostly as Sauron.

I suspect that neeps meant LOTO (Leader of the Opposition), but given his virulent and irrational obsession with and hatred of Starmer, anything’s possible.

[petej]

Brexit's happened. I loathe it, but it's the truth. That fight has been fought and lost.

To speak about Europe and the UK you need this government out of power and time. Polls continue to shift towards brexit being a terrible mistake but conned people have to realise they've been conned and that takes time and you can't force it (also age of remain and leave voters favours remain).

[fishfoodie]

It's very inconsiderate of Tories to dump so many scandals at once.

How is Keir supposed to decide on which ones to use in PMQs ?

Personally speaking, I think he has to contrast the workers on strike, who are just asking for a living wage, against the financial skullduggery of the current PM, the former PM, & the previous Chancellor, who all did, their level best, to not contribute their fair share to maintain the services these people provide.

Maybe ask if the Bumblecunts 3rd cousin, once removed, can guarantee them a loan for 800k ?

Or can the Chair of the Party recommend a good tax lawyer .... in Gibraltar ?

[dpedin]

Brexit's happened. I loathe it, but it's the truth. That fight has been fought and lost.

To speak about Europe and the UK you need this government out of power and time. Polls continue to shift towards brexit being a terrible mistake but conned people have to realise they've been conned and that takes time and you can't force it (also age of remain and leave voters favours remain).

Brexit isn't a binary choice though - there is a range of options within it and any new Gov could decide to backtrack on the 'hard' Brexit we got but never asked for and move to a closer and different trading relationship ie rejoin the Single Market and Customs Union. I don't think this would get as much flack from the public as some would expect, many would welcome it if it meant shorter queues at airports and ports and easier to spend the winter in your holiday villa in Spain. However there would be the usual crap from the usual Brexit 'mad as a bucket of frogs, brigade ie ERG, etc. It would certainly relieve the trading issues, sort the NI issue and ease our labour shortages pretty quickly. We could even claim it retained our UK 'sovrenty' whatever the feck that is or was! Given the economic disaster this current version of Brexit is creating for many I suspect it would be seen by many on all political sides as the only real way to stimulate economic growth for the next few years, ignoring the likes of JRM, Bone, et al.

[fishfoodie]

Brexit's happened. I loathe it, but it's the truth. That fight has been fought and lost.

To speak about Europe and the UK you need this government out of power and time. Polls continue to shift towards brexit being a terrible mistake but conned people have to realise they've been conned and that takes time and you can't force it (also age of remain and leave voters favours remain).

Brexit isn't a binary choice though - there is a range of options within it and any new Gov could decide to backtrack on the 'hard' Brexit we got but never asked for and move to a closer and different trading relationship ie rejoin the Single Market and Customs Union. I don't think this would get as much flack from the public as some would expect, many would welcome it if it meant shorter queues at airports and ports and easier to spend the winter in your holiday villa in Spain. However there would be the usual crap from the usual Brexit 'mad as a bucket of frogs, brigade ie ERG, etc. It would certainly relieve the trading issues, sort the NI issue and ease our labour shortages pretty quickly. We could even claim it retained our UK 'sovrenty' whatever the feck that is or was! Given the economic disaster this current version of Brexit is creating for many I suspect it would be seen by many on all political sides as the only real way to stimulate economic growth for the next few years, ignoring the likes of JRM, Bone, et al.

and it would only take about twenty years to achieve ...... because the usual scumbags have done a marvelous job of poisoning the well in the relationship between the UK, & EU; & to this day, your Government still aren't complying with the terms of the agreement, & there are multiple legal actions still in play.

In many ways Starmers position on Rejoin is irrelevant, because Rejoin is a multi-Government journey, & whatever he or anyone else does, will just get sabotaged by the next Tory Government, so until Rejoin becomes Tory Party policy too, the EU know its not worth the candle.

[dpedin]

To speak about Europe and the UK you need this government out of power and time. Polls continue to shift towards brexit being a terrible mistake but conned people have to realise they've been conned and that takes time and you can't force it (also age of remain and leave voters favours remain).

Brexit isn't a binary choice though - there is a range of options within it and any new Gov could decide to backtrack on the 'hard' Brexit we got but never asked for and move to a closer and different trading relationship ie rejoin the Single Market and Customs Union. I don't think this would get as much flack from the public as some would expect, many would welcome it if it meant shorter queues at airports and ports and easier to spend the winter in your holiday villa in Spain. However there would be the usual crap from the usual Brexit 'mad as a bucket of frogs, brigade ie ERG, etc. It would certainly relieve the trading issues, sort the NI issue and ease our labour shortages pretty quickly. We could even claim it retained our UK 'sovrenty' whatever the feck that is or was! Given the economic disaster this current version of Brexit is creating for many I suspect it would be seen by many on all political sides as the only real way to stimulate economic growth for the next few years, ignoring the likes of JRM, Bone, et al.

and it would only take about twenty years to achieve ...... because the usual scumbags have done a marvelous job of poisoning the well in the relationship between the UK, & EU; & to this day, your Government still aren't complying with the terms of the agreement, & there are multiple legal actions still in play.

In many ways Starmers position on Rejoin is irrelevant, because Rejoin is a multi-Government journey, & whatever he or anyone else does, will just get sabotaged by the next Tory Government, so until Rejoin becomes Tory Party policy too, the EU know its not worth the candle.

Again I am not sure that the EU would be all that difficult about the UK forming a closer trading relationship with them because at the end of the day they are pragmatic and it would be beneficial to both them and us. The EU know very well exactly who has driven the current shitfest and also know very well who they would prefer to work with in the future. I suspect they would be far more welcoming to a new Labour Gov and would try to help them as much as possible to achieve a success as this might ensure they stay in power. In global geopolitical terms they would be more than happy to see the UK closer to the EU fold in both trade and political terms and I suspect would be willing to forgo some of the past 6+ years as a difficult UK aberration, a bit like the US under Trump. Given issues with Russia, China and even the US the EU know full well that an EU with UK more closely aligned to them would be of enormous benefit to them. The UK is now discovering that in this new wide world where trying blocs are large and protectionism is growing that sitting as Johnny-no-mates on a little island on the edge of Europe is a very lonely place with little influence over world affairs and little chance of having meaningful and beneficial trade relationships and therefore economic growth. Who would have guessed this would happen?

I agree any full membership of the EU would be difficult and lengthy to achieve, mostly because of internal UK politics, but a few years of calm adult like negotiating could see us in a more sensible trading relationship with the EU. If we don't get this then the UK economic decline will be horrendous!

[Tichtheid]

Brexit isn't a binary choice though - there is a range of options within it and any new Gov could decide to backtrack on the 'hard' Brexit we got but never asked for and move to a closer and different trading relationship ie rejoin the Single Market and Customs Union. I don't think this would get as much flack from the public as some would expect, many would welcome it if it meant shorter queues at airports and ports and easier to spend the winter in your holiday villa in Spain. However there would be the usual crap from the usual Brexit 'mad as a bucket of frogs, brigade ie ERG, etc. It would certainly relieve the trading issues, sort the NI issue and ease our labour shortages pretty quickly. We could even claim it retained our UK 'sovrenty' whatever the feck that is or was! Given the economic disaster this current version of Brexit is creating for many I suspect it would be seen by many on all political sides as the only real way to stimulate economic growth for the next few years, ignoring the likes of JRM, Bone, et al.

and it would only take about twenty years to achieve ...... because the usual scumbags have done a marvelous job of poisoning the well in the relationship between the UK, & EU; & to this day, your Government still aren't complying with the terms of the agreement, & there are multiple legal actions still in play.

In many ways Starmers position on Rejoin is irrelevant, because Rejoin is a multi-Government journey, & whatever he or anyone else does, will just get sabotaged by the next Tory Government, so until Rejoin becomes Tory Party policy too, the EU know its not worth the candle.

Again I am not sure that the EU would be all that difficult about the UK forming a closer trading relationship with them because at the end of the day they are pragmatic and it would be beneficial to both them and us. The EU know very well exactly who has driven the current shitfest and also know very well who they would prefer to work with in the future. I suspect they would be far more welcoming to a new Labour Gov and would try to help them as much as possible to achieve a success as this might ensure they stay in power. In global geopolitical terms they would be more than happy to see the UK closer to the EU fold in both trade and political terms and I suspect would be willing to forgo some of the past 6+ years as a difficult UK aberration, a bit like the US under Trump. Given issues with Russia, China and even the US the EU know full well that an EU with UK more closely aligned to them would be of enormous benefit to them. The UK is now discovering that in this new wide world where trying blocs are large and protectionism is growing that sitting as Johnny-no-mates on a little island on the edge of Europe is a very lonely place with little influence over world affairs and little chance of having meaningful and beneficial trade relationships and therefore economic growth. Who would have guessed this would happen?

I agree any full membership of the EU would be difficult and lengthy to achieve, mostly because of internal UK politics, but a few years of calm adult like negotiating could see us in a more sensible trading relationship with the EU. If we don't get this then the UK economic decline will be horrendous!

We wouldn't get a rebate and most likely we'd have to commit to making the Euro our currency, just like any other new member.

The loons have royally fucked any chance of the UK becoming a full member of the EU again.

[Paddington Bear]

I think a Starmer government will move us closer to the EU and with a large majority and probably two terms into the EEA. I don't think he'll reopen the whole can of worms as if he does he won't have space to do anything else.
I also think 'I reduced queues at airports' really doesn't have the traction some suggest it does, and whilst anecdotes aren't data I haven't experienced a tiresome queue entering the EU myself, and had plenty whilst travelling within it. Not sure it will be a focus.

[tabascoboy]

A long thread about Zahawi's history of statements about his tax declarations, repeatedly over a long period made claims that were at best "disingenuous". Just makes you wonder what else might be uncovered about all of them in the top tier of the Tories.

[tabascoboy]

Nadhim Zahawi ‘will be gone by PMQs’, insiders say

The PM faces the prospect of a bruising session at the despatch box as he becomes embroiled in his first major firefighting exercise.

Inside sources say Nadhim Zahawi will be out of the job before Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday morning.

According to HuffPost UK reports, the Tory chairman is unlikely to survive the next 24 hours after it emerged he paid HMRC millions of pounds over an unpaid tax bill from when he was chancellor last year.

It comes amid a bruising week for prime minister Rishi Sunak, who has not only had to handle his own run-in with the police but also had to handle allegations that BBC chairman Richard Sharp reportedly helped his predecessor-but-one Boris Johnson secure a loan of up to £800,000.

The Zahawi tax saga seems to have taken precedence, with Caroline Noakes becoming the first Tory MP to break ranks and publicly call for him to go.

She told Talk TV: “The challenge for Nadhim is – look at the front pages, he’s leading too many of them. When you become the story it’s a distraction from anything else that the government is trying to do.

“There are countless examples of good, competent cabinet colleagues who’ve got themselves in a mess, who have resigned quickly and come back, really in some instances just a few months later.

“In order to get this cleared up Nadhim should stand aside and let the investigation run its course.”

But a growing number of people on the party payroll are joining in the calls.

One former minister told HuffPost UK: “Nadhim is genuinely a nice guy and good minister and has many friends in the parliamentary party

Nadhim Zahawi ‘will be gone by PMQs’, insiders say

[C69]

Yip he is gonna step aside in a dignified manner as she sees it.
He will state he has nothing to hide and that all this is a distraction.
So for the good of getting on with government he will do the right thing and cooperate fully.

Or he is fecked

[SaintK]

A long thread about Zahawi's history of statements about his tax declarations, repeatedly over a long period made claims that were at best "disingenuous". Just makes you wonder what else might be uncovered about all of them in the top tier of the Tories.

Fantastic forensics from Neidle. Saw him on TV last night, bit of a character as well!

[tabascoboy]

This sort of collusion with oligarchs out of self-interest has been an issue going back to the 1990s for sure, but this one is even worse in the circumstances...more evidence of a Government not fit for purpose

Revealed: UK government helped sanctioned Putin ally sue British journalist

The UK government helped the boss of Russia’s murderous mercenary army to circumvent its own sanctions and launch a targeted legal attack on a British journalist, openDemocracy can reveal.

Yevgeny Prigozhin is the founder of Wagner, a private army that the US government last week announced it would designate a “transnational criminal organisation”, allowing it to impose even tougher sanctions on the group. For years it has been accused of human rights abuses and war crimes in Ukraine and across the world in support of Putin’s regime.

Sanctions introduced in the UK and Europe in 2020 were supposed to prevent anyone from doing business with Prigozhin. He had also been sanctioned in the US in 2018.

But a vast cache of hacked emails shows that, under the leadership of Rishi Sunak, the UK Treasury issued special licences in 2021 to let the oligarch override sanctions and launch an aggressive legal campaign against a journalist in the London courts.

The notorious libel suit against Eliot Higgins personally followed revelations by his website Bellingcat about Wagner’s shadowy operations, and was part of Prigozhin’s strategy to undermine the sanctions against him.

The case collapsed in March 2022, in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But key details of how the sanctioned oligarch was able to pursue the legal attack have remained a secret until now.

An investigation by openDemocracy has found that:

The government granted licences for a British law firm to work on the case, and approved key steps along the way;
Sanctions prevented Prigozhin from coming to London, but the UK government gave permission for his British lawyers to fly business class to St Petersburg so they could meet face-to-face and finalise their legal attack on Higgins;

Prigozhin paid his London lawyers directly via wire transfer from Russia, causing the UK bank to initially withhold funds due to sanctions;
The London case was a key plank of his strategy to thwart the global sanctions.
The vast cache of hacked emails and documents from one of Russia’s biggest law firms was made available to openDemocracy and The Intercept, which first revealed other details from the hack.

It lays bare the incredible ease with which one of the world’s most notorious warmongers was able to use the UK legal system to try and further his aims, even while sanctioned.

More at https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/prigoz ... bel-slapp/

[Sandstorm]

The government granted licences for a British law firm to work on the case, and approved key steps along the way;

Love to know which civil servant signed those off.