Keir Starmer Labour Leader

[Paul the Wolf]

@Maticmaker - I did take the time to listen to the speech Reeves made last night at the MAIS lecture - hoping for some insight but sadly mainly the same old waffle and no substance. To avoid falling asleep I skipped here and there - but I think she managed to avoid saying the B word. Good luck - you're going to need it.

 

[Maticmaker]

@Maticmaker - I did take the time to listen to the speech Reeves made last night at the MAIS lecture - hoping for some insight but sadly mainly the same old waffle and no substance. To avoid falling asleep I skipped here and there - but I think she managed to avoid saying the B word. Good luck - you're going to need it.

Don't doubt it, but Brexit is way down the list.... there is more bad news to come before we even get that far. Starmer , Reeves etc. are all avoiding giving any 'definite's' certainly not until the GE date is announced. They are just highlighting the 'signposts' they will be using to plot their '1000 mile journey, and that's starts with the first step'... which is to win the GE with a large majority.*
They are banking on being the only place for most people who want to be on the winning side to put their vote on the ballot paper. Tories might even consider a pact with Reform, but it will only be to stop Labour getting the kind of majority it wants.

[*High stakes game, in run-up to the GE, even higher stakes, when the result is in; if this isn't the result, all bets are off]

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Don't doubt it, but Brexit is way down the list.... there is more bad news to come before we even get that far. Starmer , Reeves etc. are all avoiding giving any 'definite's' certainly not until the GE date is announced. They are just highlighting the 'signposts' they will be using to plot their '1000 mile journey, and that's starts with the first step'... which is to win the GE with a large majority.*
They are banking on being the only place for most people who want to be on the winning side to put their vote on the ballot paper. Tories might even consider a pact with Reform, but it will only be to stop Labour getting the kind of majority it wants.

[*High stakes game, in run-up to the GE, even higher stakes, when the result is in; if this isn't the result, all bets are off]

But to do what. She talks of creating new jobs etc etc but there's no plan how this to come about. It may work for the ordinary elector who just believes all the sound bites and they hope they get voted in on the basis of that. But then what.

It sounds like someone who's gone to the bank for a loan. I want to create all these jobs and build a factory and we're going to be the best ever.

Bank manager asks, but what are you going to make? Who are your customers? Who are your suppliers? How do you compete with other countries? And so on.....

Rachel Reeves stares back blankly.

 

[Maticmaker]

right now, having a large impact on the Uk and it will get considerably worse during the next government term, whether it's Labour or Tory.

This is what will drive the changes Starmer needs to make in outlook terms going forward, but it won't alter the here and now which will be his priority.
If he cannot be seen to have a reasonable approach to reducing the debt burden, he will make little progress with whatever else he attempts, net zero included. The approach will not only have to be effective in both the long (for future generations) term and the short term(for the here and now) it will have to be limited to specific areas and will need a social contract with the people, that is fair and equitable, and in agreed areas, that would be specified in the contract.

What goes into the social contract and what doesn't, will be the moment of truth for the next Labour government.
If the Tories win there will not be a contract, social or otherwise, if the voting throws up no overall power, then the country will sink under the waves as the 'coalition ' tries (forever) to decide what should or should not be in the contract..

 

[Paul the Wolf]

This is what will drive the changes Starmer needs to make in outlook terms going forward, but it won't alter the here and now which will be his priority.
If he cannot be seen to be have a reasonable approach to reducing the debt burden, he will make little progress with whatever else he attempts, net zero included. The approach will not only have to be effective in both the long (for future generations) term and the short term(for the here and now) it will have to be limited to specific areas and will need a social contract with the people, that is fair and equitable, and in agreed areas, that would be specified in the contract.

What goes into the social contract and what doesn't, will be the moment of truth for the next Labour government.
If the Tories win there will not be a contract, social or otherwise, if the voting throws up no overall power, then the country will sink under the waves as the 'coalition ' tries (forever) to decide what should or should not be in the contract..

But to get better conditions for the country - before all that it has to have growth and needs massive investment. Sorry but the base line is how the UK builds its economy and trades with the rest of the world. Ignoring that fundamental issue and pretending that cutting off your major sales and supply line doesn't matter is vastly irresponsible at best.

 

[CassiusClaymore]

Just got an election flyer through the door from Labour. Full on Union Jack spread so going all in for the flag shagger vote this time around.

 

[Giggsyking]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Sir kid starver, you must give this one to Catman.

 

[Maticmaker]

But to get better conditions for the country - before all that it has to have growth and needs massive investment. Sorry but the base line is how the UK builds its economy and trades with the rest of the world. Ignoring that fundamental issue and pretending that cutting off your major sales and supply line doesn't matter is vastly irresponsible at best.

Yes, no argument about the UK rebuilding its economy, so will half the world, especially in Europe and the northern hemisphere. Yes, it's a priority, but it's not the only one and cannot be attempted in isolation or on its own needs alone, there are other priority issues to be identified (and agreed) and then sorted.. issues like Housing, control of Energy and Water, employment issues/ inactive populous/filling vacancies, migration, and of course health and education two staple areas effectively embracing the whole of both the current and future populous and both at present in desperate need, requiring 'oxygen'.

The aim of rebuilding the economy (post Covid and Brexit) is something to start out after, but its not going to be achieved overnight, even the most successful economic policy will take years to take effect. Starmer will need a wider canvas to start off with and that is why Labour is keeping its brushes at the ready and attending to deciding what will be on its palette.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Yes, no argument about the UK rebuilding its economy, so will half the world, especially in Europe and the northern hemisphere. Yes, it's a priority, but it's not the only one and cannot be attempted in isolation or on its own needs alone, there are other priority issues to be identified (and agreed) and then sorted.. issues like Housing, control of Energy and Water, employment issues/ inactive populous/filling vacancies, migration, and of course health and education two staple areas effectively embracing the whole of both the current and future populous and both at present in desperate need, requiring 'oxygen'.

The aim of rebuilding the economy (post Covid and Brexit) is something to start out after, but its not going to be achieved overnight, even the most successful economic policy will take years to take effect. Starmer will need a wider canvas to start off with and that is why Labour is keeping its brushes at the ready and attending to deciding what will be on its palette.

But the rest of Europe or anyone else in the world don't have to worry about Brexit.
I understand that the national priority issues will take time and there's no instant fix.

But what's the starting point for renewing British growth, it seems to be Labour burying their heads in the sand and it will be alright. It won't. They won't have the same investors, customers or suppliers.
The next three or four years will be terrible if they don't wake up.

Even the Tories are aware, they can't say Brexit is a catastrophic disaster but they're desperately trying to find some country to say they've done a trade deal with in order to fool the people before the election.

I really don't think (I know) Starmer and his crew, especially him and Reeves, realise the gravity of the situation. But they'll find out eventually, too late of course, more than four years too late already.

 

[Maticmaker]

But the rest of Europe or anyone else in the world don't have to worry about Brexit.

Neither do we, that is my whole point.
Brexit is past, its consigned to the history books, a new government whatever the persuasion will need to find new ways forward. It may indeed require another referendum, but not a re-run, it would be on much wider issues than Brexit, but quite honestly I cannot see any government having the stomach, let alone the time for another such method with years of study and observance required beforehand to make sure everybody knows what they are voting for, and above all knowing what it is you want at the end of it.

Applying a 'silo' type mentality to the economy, or any other area, will not work, a grown up approach to working out a set of interlocking initiatives is required Hopefully Starmer and his team are working on just such a project... right now.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Neither do we, that is my whole point.
Brexit is past, its consigned to the history books, a new government whatever the persuasion will need to find new ways forward. It may indeed require another referendum, but not a re-run, it would be on much wider issues than Brexit, but quite honestly I cannot see any government having the stomach, let alone the time for another such method with years of study and observance required beforehand to make sure everybody knows what they are voting for, and above all knowing what it is you want at the end of it.

Applying a 'silo' type mentality to the economy, or any other area, will not work, a grown up approach to working out a set of interlocking initiatives is required Hopefully Starmer and his team are working on just such a project... right now.

Why do you keep saying it's history. The vote is over, the decision has been taken but the consequences are only just starting and the full impact will happen in the next four years.

Starmer never understood the consequences and still doesn't. Neither does he understand how trade works and all the rest of it. Four years he's had to forcefully challenge the wisdom of voting for it as opposition but all he's come up with is , we can do it better and chasing the Brexiter's voters. This may get him elected this year.

So a short term gain as PM for maybe a few years if he's lucky. He's told the people he's going to make something work that is impossible to work. He'll be gone and the Tories will be back at the next GE. They'll blame him for not making the impossible work which he said he would do. Then another 10 or 15 years with Labour in opposition or disappeared altogether.

 

[Drifter]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[711]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Not a single word on the policies of the people he is going to vote for.

 

[TheGame]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

He's just a cnut. He's another one just to make a name for himself. How many times has he quit Labour now? I've lost count.

 

[TheGame]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Sir kid starver, you must give this one to Catman.

Let's also name and shame the people cosying up to Saddam while he murdered his own people while we are at it.

 

[Dobba]

He's just a cnut. He's another one just to make a name for himself. How many times has he quit Labour now? I've lost count.

Once. How old do you think he is if he's left more than once and this last spell in the party has lasted 24 years?

 

[TheGame]

Once. How old do you think he is if he's left more than once and this last spell in the party has lasted 24 years?

He's been resigning, threatening to resign, saying he's resigning numerous times over the years. He's an attention seeking cnut. Can't stand him. Maybe here and there, he has an opinion which you could agree with but overall he's a cnut.

 

[Dobba]

He's been resigning, threatening to resign, saying he's resigning numerous times over the years. He's an attention seeking cnut. Can't stand him. Maybe here and there, he has an opinion which you could agree with but overall he's a cnut.

Well considering you made up the idea that he's left the Labour Party more than once, maybe the version of him that only exists in your head is a cnut.

 

[Sweet Square]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

He isn’t mentioning the part where he said Israel has the right to commit war crimes in Gaza.

 

[The Corinthian]

He's been resigning, threatening to resign, saying he's resigning numerous times over the years. He's an attention seeking cnut. Can't stand him. Maybe here and there, he has an opinion which you could agree with but overall he's a cnut.

Owen Jones is a great guy and has been giving a voice to the voiceless for years. Whether he's resigned or threatened to in the past is really a minor thing to hold against him. It's people like him and Ash Sarkar we should be giving platforms too.

 

[The Corinthian]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

He isn’t mentioning the part where he said Israel has the right to commit war crimes in Gaza.

This is the real cnut in this thread.
(Not Sweet Square and not Jeremy Vine).

 

[TheGame]

Owen Jones is a great guy and has been giving a voice to the voiceless for years. Whether he's resigned or threatened to in the past is really a minor thing to hold against him. It's people like him and Ash Sarkar we should be giving platforms too.

I've got a lot of time for Grace Blakely with her ideas around capitalism, not so much Owen Jones.

 

[TheGame]

Well considering you made up the idea that he's left the Labour Party more than once, maybe the version of him that only exists in your head is a cnut.

That's my opinion of him, maybe I'm overly harsh but there you go.

 

[Maticmaker]

Why do you keep saying it's history. The vote is over, the decision has been taken but the consequences are only just starting and the full impact will happen in the next four years.

Starmer never understood the consequences and still doesn't. Neither does he understand how trade works and all the rest of it. Four years he's had to forcefully challenge the wisdom of voting for it as opposition but all he's come up with is , we can do it better and chasing the Brexiter's voters. This may get him elected this year.

So a short term gain as PM for maybe a few years if he's lucky. He's told the people he's going to make something work that is impossible to work. He'll be gone and the Tories will be back at the next GE. They'll blame him for not making the impossible work which he said he would do. Then another 10 or 15 years with Labour in opposition or disappeared altogether.

Because it is history... a new way has to be found that's all Starmer is saying. He has ideas that will work or they won't, but that optimism is what the public want. It's no use saying a mistake was made, and we are forever in the s**t, people aren't that bothered about what is past, they want to know what is coming next, and that is what will get him elected.
Arrangements than can be made and will be made when it's in both the interests of the EU and the UK, rules will be amended, relaxed or changed or governments will look the other way, when both sides see an advantage. Right now the EU has things to attended to of its own and human nature being what it is, a way will be found, where there is a political will to do so...Starmer's biggest problem is setting himself aside from the Boris methods, in the eyes of the EU, that is all he is attempting at this stage.

Both, an incoming government in the UK and the existing powers that be in the EU, have both got more to worry about than just trade rules. If a way, (as you seem to say) cannot ever be found, then the UK and the EU trading will descend into chaos and history suggests it will be a lot harder for the 27 states in the EU to hold things together. It's in nobody's interest to fight old battles and in everyone's interest to seek a way forward.

Starmer is signalling to the EU that he wants to take steps forward not backward and suggests/hints he will ease out the rope as he goes. For the public in the UK it's simple "get rid of these clowns and let us have a go" and he will be sure to tread carefully, so as not to upset the horses, although those to his left will still be grumbling in their beer, whatever he does.

 

[Herman Toothrot]

That's my opinion of him, maybe I'm overly harsh but there you go.

Which bits of his resignation article do you disagree with? He doesn't himself say if he's a cnut or not, so that one's off the table.

 

[TheGame]

Which bits of his resignation article do you disagree with? He doesn't himself say if he's a cnut or not, so that one's off the table.

Owen Jones has never got over the fact Corbyn never won the election and has been rallying against Labour ever since. I don't agree with Starmer's policies on a number of issues including Gaza but I wouldn't note someone who has been going on against Labour then resigning is hardly big news us. For me, he's been an attention seeking for a few years.

 

[Herman Toothrot]

Owen Jones has never got over the fact Corbyn never won the election and has been rallying against Labour ever since. I don't agree with Starmer's policies on a number of issues including Gaza but I wouldn't note someone who has been going on against Labour then resigning is hardly big news us. For me, he's been an attention seeking for a few years.

He actually tried to get Corbyn to quit, and he also wrote about how Starmer deserved a chance.

I don't think you've read the article. Which is fine, but maybe give it a rest.

 

[Dobba]

Owen Jones has never got over the fact Corbyn never won the election and has been rallying against Labour ever since. I don't agree with Starmer's policies on a number of issues including Gaza but I wouldn't note someone who has been going on against Labour then resigning is hardly big news us. For me, he's been an attention seeking for a few years.

What on earth are you on about? He's been routinely mocked for the last three years because everytime Starmer reveals he's an authoritarian he's been the first to tell people they still need to vote for the Starmer Party anyway.

Seriously, the version of Owen Jones you hate exists solely in your imagination.

 

[TheGame]

What on earth are you on about? He's been routinely mocked for the last three years because everytime Starmer reveals he's an authoritarian he's been the first to tell people they still need to vote for the Starmer Party anyway.

Seriously, the version of Owen Jones you hate exists solely in your imagination.

We'll agree to disagree.

 

[Dobba]

We'll agree to disagree.

Disagree? You've made two claims which are demonstrable bollocks. This isn't a matter of opinion, the things you've claimed categorically didn't happen.

 

[africanspur]

Owen Jones has never got over the fact Corbyn never won the election and has been rallying against Labour ever since. I don't agree with Starmer's policies on a number of issues including Gaza but I wouldn't note someone who has been going on against Labour then resigning is hardly big news us. For me, he's been an attention seeking for a few years.

This is a really odd way to look at it.

He's a journalist. A left wing journalist. His job is literally to write about politics in the UK and within that, to provide his own (left wing) viewpoint. So I don't know what the attention seeking thing is about. He's literally doing his job.

I don't remember it that way. I remember him (unless I'm wrong) initially cautiously asking people to give Starmer a chance. Which is probably the stage most of us were at at the beginning.

Nobody ever thought he was massively left wing but since taking on the leadership, he has continued to drift closer and closer to Tory positions, on so many topics.

He's lost various people at different points along that journey. It's OK to acknowledge that. He'll still almost certainly win the election. It's OK to acknowledge that. He'll realistically win it almost by default, rather than because people are actually excited by his policies. And along his journey of u turns and silly positions, like I said, he has lost a lot of us at different various points.

Fundamentally a politicians job is to appeal to voters, rather than assume they'll be backed by default.

Other than a bit less corruption and a bit less culture war (which in fairness is still a big win), there is essentially nothing that excites me about Starmer or the current iteration of labour.

 

[TheGame]

He actually tried to get Corbyn to quit, and he also wrote about how Starmer deserved a chance.

I don't think you've read the article. Which is fine, but maybe give it a rest.

I'm not referring to the article, just his past endeavours. I've not seen anything about him getting Corbyn to quit but maybe I've missed that.

 

[TheGame]

Disagree? You've made two claims which are demonstrable bollocks. This isn't a matter of opinion, the things you've claimed categorically didn't happen.

No I have an opinion of someone which you agree with it. You want to defend him go ahead, my opinion of him is different to yours. He has failed to accept Corbyn losing and has never got over it. My criticism of him may have gone over the top and I'm not defending Starmer by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Dobba]

No I have an opinion of someone which you agree with it. You want to defend him go ahead, my opinion of him is different to yours. He has failed to accept Corbyn losing and has never got over it. My criticism of him may have gone over the top and I'm not defending Starmer by any stretch of the imagination.

No, you implied he'd left the party multiple times, which was absolute bullshit and that he'd repeatedly attacked Starmer when it has literally been the exact opposite.

That's not opinion, that's straight up lying.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Because it is history... a new way has to be found that's all Starmer is saying. He has ideas that will work or they won't, but that optimism is what the public want. It's no use saying a mistake was made, and we are forever in the s**t, people aren't that bothered about what is past, they want to know what is coming next, and that is what will get him elected.
Arrangements than can be made and will be made when it's in both the interests of the EU and the UK, rules will be amended, relaxed or changed or governments will look the other way, when both sides see an advantage. Right now the EU has things to attended to of its own and human nature being what it is, a way will be found, where there is a political will to do so...Starmer's biggest problem is setting himself aside from the Boris methods, in the eyes of the EU, that is all he is attempting at this stage.

Both, an incoming government in the UK and the existing powers that be in the EU, have both got more to worry about than just trade rules. If a way, (as you seem to say) cannot ever be found, then the UK and the EU trading will descend into chaos and history suggests it will be a lot harder for the 27 states in the EU to hold things together. It's in nobody's interest to fight old battles and in everyone's interest to seek a way forward.

Starmer is signalling to the EU that he wants to take steps forward not backward and suggests/hints he will ease out the rope as he goes. For the public in the UK it's simple "get rid of these clowns and let us have a go" and he will be sure to tread carefully, so as not to upset the horses, although those to his left will still be grumbling in their beer, whatever he does.

I really can't get this through. It's because of the UK press and inept journalism. The Agreement between the EU and the Uk is decided and agreed. The rules aren't going to change. What isn't in there is covered by the WTO regulations. Customs union regulations will apply, single market rules will apply. Why would it be a lot harder for the EU, this is Daily Express nonsense.There's no new agreement to come between the EU and the UK. As I said Starmer doesn't understand it. Even now Reeves and Starmer are still wittering on about the veterinary agreement. Over four years have been lost already. Another five will be lost with these two at the wheel.

The timetable for the next year or so is the introduction of physical checks on imports from the EU to the UK, later in the year the new EU entry/exit system comes into force. Then the rules of origin change. That's after one year. Phasing out of grace periods etc. DUP already causing trouble within a few weeks of going back to Stormont.

But this is really not what I'm asking. The UK have lost a lot of business with the EU and elsewhere because of Brexit and will lose a lot more over the next few years as the full measures are implemented. They haven't replaced that lost business with anything because there's nothing to replace it with despite the unicorn nonsense from the Brexiters. Developping markets don't want to buy British products or EU products, they want to sell the products they are developping to the UK and elsewhere. That's the point of them being 'developping'. The market place is the developped countries who can afford and want to buy western products. The rest is just top-ups ,a bit extra here and there.

Ergo, the question is how is the UK going to develop a stable growing economy having cut off their prime customers and suppliers; the Tories know it's all nonsense apart from the hardened dimwits like Truss, Lee and Mogg but I get the impression that Starmer and Reeves still believe. And the Tories will lose votes to Reform and Labour because the Brexiters still believe one of them will take them to the promised land.

 

[TheGame]

No, you implied he'd left the party multiple times, which was absolute bullshit and that he'd repeatedly attacked Starmer when it has literally been the exact opposite.

That's not opinion, that's straight up lying.

So he hasn’t attacked Starmer and Labour?? Make your mind up. Im confused. Why is he leaving then???I have a different view to you but you just can’t stand.

 

[Dobba]

So he hasn’t attacked Starmer and Labour?? Make your mind up. Im confused. Why is he leaving then???I have a different view to you but you just can’t stand.

Once again, he has been routinely mocked because everytime Starmer reveals who he is his solution has been to vote for them and then lobby for change. 'Stay and fight'

You've come up with two reasons you think he's a cnut and neither of them have actually happened outside of your head.

 

[TheGame]

Once again, he has been routinely mocked because everytime Starmer reveals who he is his solution has been to vote for them and then lobby for change. 'Stay and fight'

You've come up with two reasons you think he's a cnut and neither of them have actually happened outside of your head.

No I believe he has been attention seeking for a while now on social media. I can’t take him seriously. I’m not defending Starmer as I keep saying. I think we’ll just end this conversation. Clearly different views.

 

[Maticmaker]

I really can't get this through. It's because of the UK press and inept journalism. The Agreement between the EU and the Uk is decided and agreed. The rules aren't going to change.

They rules were never going to change, (assuming you are referring to EU requirements) that is not the issue, the decision was taken to leave a developing political entity that had once been solely a trading block and we left, that is the history bit.
Trade will suffer in some areas that is true and the country will have to take account of whether that will be a 'forever loss' of markets for us, and/or a 'forever' a loss of markets in the UK to the EU. However, 'events' (as Macmillan noted) occur, and these 'events' will change over time and will be influenced by many things, including how both the EU and the UK is governed. As developments elsewhere in areas (not just Trade) as yet undefined, e.g. the real impact of climate changes and the nuisances in political changes/affiliations occurring in both the northern and southern hemispheres, will influence events and ultimately trade issues.
When the UK joined the EEC it got a 'kick up the backside' in many ways, because it need it, now the UK has left the EU it will receive another kick up the backside, this time it will be a double whammy, trade and massive debt.

Now this is a bit of flag waving I admit, but this country does best when its up against it, we have a way of buckling down etc. we have after all survived 14 years of Tory smoozing and profit-taking, but sooner or later one Government, probably the next one, is going to have to be brutally honest with its citizens.
I suspect Starmer is lining up to be the one who breaks the bad news... but he wants a very large majority in Parliament to enable him to batten-down the hatches and forced down the medicine.

Ergo, the question is how is the UK going to develop a stable growing economy having cut off their prime customers and suppliers;

I think it will need to be via an agreed agenda... a 'social contract'.... limited to specific things the majority of the public need, and would by and large support. The contract would be designed to last over three parliamentary terms with both in contract and end of term evaluation... this last form of evaluation being via GE, that either ends the government/contract, or renews for another term.

 

[DanH]

No, you implied he'd left the party multiple times, which was absolute bullshit and that he'd repeatedly attacked Starmer when it has literally been the exact opposite.

That's not opinion, that's straight up lying.

Let's look at 'straight up lying'

"... and that he'd repeatedly attacked Starmer when it has literally been the exact opposite.''

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Same incident, different tweets.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1705199040298680343?t=0-x1-KqGNNUJAfb632EAoQ&s=19

https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1699042090674446657?t=98zKPnf3knoyHUt7jsqy8w&s=19

https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1692296083429343720?t=mw6iIPuQdPynSeMWI-fd4A&s=19

Just a very quick selection.

Owen Jones podcast titles such as 'Starmer's Shameless Lies About Gaza' 'Keir Starmer: A Dishonest Man'

@TheGame it was incorrect about Owen Jones threatening to leave, but perfectly accurate to say he has criticised Starmer repeatedly.