What I’ve come to realise about Keir Starmer….

Yes it is a brilliant word.

M0nica

I agree that Starmer should do all he can to clean up his party and Parliament, but history shows that the Labour party is essentially a fissiparous organisation, and it never fails to let a good split or conspiracy spoil its chances of power or exercise of it if it gets it.

All parties are Monica, I still don’t see the point you were making? The only regimes which completely manage divisions of opinion are dictatorships. The left is the least influential it has been for many years in the Labour Party at the moment, and that is down to the way Starmer has managed it since he took over the leadership - it may rise again in the dying years of the next Labour government as the right has in this government, but it’s not a foregone conclusion, there may be a political sea change with different parties - as there was in the 20th century. We’ll have to wait and see.

MissAdventure

Off to google I go....
Fissiparous

... I had to search for that one, too!

Lovely word though. I'm going to use it in conversation and watch for the bewildered faces...

Off to google I go....
Fissiparous

Monica are the Conservatives fissiparous too? What a great term btw.

I agree that Starmer should do all he can to clean up his party and Parliament, but history shows that the Labour party is essentially a fissiparous organisation, and it never fails to let a good split or conspiracy spoil its chances of power or exercise of it if it gets it.

I’m feeling heartened by so many posts acknowledging the task ahead and seeing Starmer as a man of integrity. Agree with Doodledog and Dickens

Doodledog

It would be odd if a party didn't have disagreements about policy. That's why they are there - we may as well have a dictator if one person is going to decide and nobody disagrees.

I believe that Starmer has integrity, and will be a refreshing change from the current and recent cabinets. The proof of the pudding, of course, will be in the eating, but nothing he has done so far leads me to believe that he will be dishonest. He will have problems with timescale, as the economy has been ruined so the changes he wants to make will take longer than one term to implement. Meanwhile, people will be sniping from the sidelines, which must be incredibly dispiriting, but if he can rise above it and just keep on making progress the country should be a kinder and less divided place after a while.

Some of the challenges he will face will be huge. And I'm pretty sure he's well aware of that.

How much scope he has to make changes that will materially affect the various disaffected groups remains to be seen.

He has to please the wealthy, business, the financial institutions, etc, as well as the more disadvantaged.

And of course, his and Labour's critics will be watching him carefully, but - as you say, if he can weather that, there might be a glimmer of hope for a better society, eventually.

But, oh! - what a fight he has on his hands!

Definitely agree with Doodledog

It would be odd if a party didn't have disagreements about policy. That's why they are there - we may as well have a dictator if one person is going to decide and nobody disagrees.

I believe that Starmer has integrity, and will be a refreshing change from the current and recent cabinets. The proof of the pudding, of course, will be in the eating, but nothing he has done so far leads me to believe that he will be dishonest. He will have problems with timescale, as the economy has been ruined so the changes he wants to make will take longer than one term to implement. Meanwhile, people will be sniping from the sidelines, which must be incredibly dispiriting, but if he can rise above it and just keep on making progress the country should be a kinder and less divided place after a while.

The Labour Party does have disagreements about policy but how anyone can say it’s anywhere near the bin fighting in the tories in recent years is a mystery

I’m not sure what you’re saying Monica, that he shouldn’t do all he feasibly can to clean up the party because it’s doomed to failure? Surely it’s making strenuous efforts to improve probity that count. I don’t believe that any political party anywhere in the world is without factions and mavericks.

But having someone with ethics at the top of the hierrarchy will not stop everything he tries to do being undermined by those around him.

We have seen the Labour parties penchant for conspiracies and plotting, and they never let a chance to become the government get in the way. They would be in power now if they hadn't elected Jeremy Corbyn as their leader. The same way back with Michael Foot. The Labour party's capacity to shoot itself in the foot should never be underestimated.

If Starmer gets in next time, and I hope he does, it will be because of how vile the Conservatives have become rather than because the country whole heartedly embraces the Labour party itself -

Monica The first step toward cleansing the Augean stables is to have someone with ethics at the top of the Westminster hierarchy.

Whitehall needs to modernise the way it does business. It also needs to understand that basic human needs are not being met and that poor people and families with young children need to be prioritised.

It's up to the government (Westminster) to do that, ronib, not the civil service (Whitehall)

Elegran You have considerable more confidence in what will happen after the next election, if there is a change of government than I do.

Sleaze, corruption is endemic in the whole parliamentary system. Look at the problems Starmer is having eliminating anti-semitism in his party. Only last week a candidate was disowned within days of a by-election for coming out with overtly anti-semitic remarks.

He hasn't succeeded in stopping anti-semitism, i fail to see how he will be abl to ensure his governemtn would be full of 'sea green incorruptibles'. I think that phrased was first used to describe Robespierre, who was behind the wholesale guillotining of the aristoctrats and everyone else who disagreed with him.

Perhaps Stramer should bring back the guillotine with Angela Rayner as chief tricoteuse

What makes you think

I would have thought that Yvette Cooper at the home office would be an immediate change for the better. Experienced, articulate and on top of her brief. I think there will be a great deal more talent, intellect and work ethic on the front bench as a whole.

Elegran Paradoxically we live in a much better information connected world than previous generations but parts of the administration here feel more akin to another century.
Whitehall needs to modernise the way it does business. It also needs to understand that basic human needs are not being met and that poor people and families with young children need to be prioritised.
Government and opposition need to take a hard look at the situation in this country and focus on fixing the Uk before becoming embroiled in the rest of the world.

How long do you think it will take, then, to reverse the decline, ronib, if you don't see much happening soon ? I could foresee a change for the better fairly quickly, as existing and potential MPs realise that integrity gets them promotion into public office more effectively than conniving with sleaze.

ronib

Yes of course. ‘take an interest’. Don’t expect it to change anything very much very soon.

If everyone "took an interest" in the calibre of the people they elect to govern them, there would be at last a CHANCE of getting enough "good men and true" (and good women and true, of course)

If everyone is so cynical that they just let their "right honourable" representatives have free rein to allocate lucrative contracts to friends, ignore the regulations that they arrest ordinary citizens for breaking, and use their Parliamentary privilege for dishonourable end, then there is no hope for any of us.

Elegran

For evil to triumph, it is necessary only that good men do nothing.

In today’s world that is applicable in so many circumstances. Some good men and women are doing nothing and evil is triumphing.

Yes of course. ‘take an interest’. Don’t expect it to change anything very much very soon.

I have come to the conclusion ( after many years )that Australia is doing the right thing in having compulsory voting. It will never happen in the UK but it does make people at least think. Sure, some spoil their ballot papers, but they are in a minority.

Elegran

For evil to triumph, it is necessary only that good men do nothing.

If you read "shambolic government" for "evil", and "the electorate" for "good men" you get the situation the country would be in stay in if we followed your suggested path, ronib. Do you really recommend leaving it all to power-seekers, anarchy, personal ambition and greed, and the rule of those who care most for their own aggrandishment and wealth, and least for the good of the whole nation?

That is what you get if you just "leave them to it." The country's leaders need to be supervised at all times by those they lead. That is the main theme of democracy.

👏👏👏

Casdon

Definitely not forget about it ronib, that paves the path to dictatorship. I think actually it should be the opposite, if more people took more interest in politics it would raise the standards.

... if more people took more interest in politics it would raise the standards.

Hear, hear.

Voter Apathy is dangerous.

"Living as best we can" sounds OK in theory, but it is a bit of a siege mentality. Our lives are governed to a great extent by government decisions - we should certainly take an interest in the making of those decisions.

As you say - that would certainly facilitate a dictatorship style government.

Do people live well under a totalitarian state? What options do they have for living as best they can - other than keeping out of trouble and making 'do' with what such a life has to offer?