Starmer admits he’s frustrated by his first year in power.

Ilovecheese

He has let Farage take control of the narrative over the summer. Sometimes he seems to not see or not understand what is happening, hence his dismissal of his mps concerns over taking money away from ill and disabled people. Or he tries to compete with Farage (island of strangers) when he should be leading and promoting a vision that we can all get behind. Being successful at talking to leaders of other countries is not enough to make him an effective leader at home.

That's because he has been concerned with world affairs.

Farage has taken advantage of that, a case of Rome burning whilst Starmer is politicking on the world stage.

I meant to quote thst:

Being successful at talking to leaders of other countries is not enough to make him an effective leader at home.

I agree.

Every new government gets in because the public are not satisfied with the previous one.
Every new government blames the problems they face on the actions of the previous government.

Every government in opposition points out the defects of the government in power and assures voters that they can do better if they are elected.

So what has KS done, to cause so much disenchantment among so many, so early?

If Nigel Farage and Reform hadn’t dominated the news over the summer, Labour would have made no announcements about the immigration hotels finishing early (we’ll see) or the restricting of family members coming over.

They just seem to jump on these types of issues when it’s obvious things aren’t going their way.

Mollygo

Every new government gets in because the public are not satisfied with the previous one.
Every new government blames the problems they face on the actions of the previous government.

Every government in opposition points out the defects of the government in power and assures voters that they can do better if they are elected.

So what has KS done, to cause so much disenchantment among so many, so early?

He’s not provided instant results or even hope that it will come.

“WE” are all in the same boat half the population don’t have enough, the other half have too much and don’t want to give anything up.

Starmer knows what needs to be done and started in the right vein but several U Turns negated most of it because his own MPs would not back him. He has now announced a reshuffle
strengthening his treasury and finance team, to make up for Reeves’s shortcomings.

I hope he succeeds, if not it’s worse for the poorest.

Who in their right mind would want to be a PM at the moment, let alone PM.

It is a poisoned chalice.

He always appears to be on the back foot to me regarding domestic affairs, on the world stage he comes across more statesmanlike.

Give him a break folks, it's his birthday today. Though I doubt he feels much like celebrating!

escaped

Give him a break folks, it's his birthday today. Though I doubt he feels much like celebrating!

I’m afraid that if someone sets out determined to be a PM and turns out to be so bloody bad at it, they don’t deserve any breaks.

I will add that he’s only one among many in recent years. Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak. All disastrous.

I didn't vote him into [power. That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it.
He didn't inherit a well run country by any means but he is too easily swayed to change his mind instead of standing his ground. The WFP's and the benefits overhaul, to name just 2, both needed doing. A means tested WFP plan would have protected those who need help with heating and would not have paid ex=pats the full allowance when most of them never turn the heating on! The benefits system is unsustainable. The genuinely disabled should be properly cared for but something is very wrong when you can be better off on benefits than working.
He's had a poor year in my opinion. Him and his Cabinet are all talk and no action. Never mind, Rachel Reeves is loitering in the background honing her Autumn Budget. We must all be looking forward to that!!!

Give the man a break! He can't be responsible for everything that's going wrong, on the world or national stage.
The media hate him, and that's good enough for me.

Allira

Ilovecheese

He has let Farage take control of the narrative over the summer. Sometimes he seems to not see or not understand what is happening, hence his dismissal of his mps concerns over taking money away from ill and disabled people. Or he tries to compete with Farage (island of strangers) when he should be leading and promoting a vision that we can all get behind. Being successful at talking to leaders of other countries is not enough to make him an effective leader at home.

That's because he has been concerned with world affairs.

Farage has taken advantage of that, a case of Rome burning whilst Starmer is politicking on the world stage.

One of his nicknames is ‘Never Hear Keir’. Quite.
This man when asked admitted he prefers Dave’s to the HoC.

*Here not hear ha!

Mt61

FriedGreenTomatoes2

So are we.

I thought you now liked him FGT?

I always voted Labour.
Although I didn’t vote for Starmer I was prepared to back him and hoped his ‘bank manager, boring, Mr Capability’ would cut the mustard.

It hasn’t and I’m very disappointed in him thus far.

I voted for him as Labour leader and Labour at the election.
I don’t deny it’s been fits and starts. I see the change of plans on wfa and benefits/pip/disability as very poor management with the parliamentary Labour Party. It can’t have been a total surprise that so many mp’s opposed these proposals. It should have been resolved as best as possible before public announcements were made

FWIW I don’t believe wfa should be a universal benefit. I’d have linked it to pension tax credits and put those at a more realistic, generous start point.

I know benefit fraud a drop in the ocean compared to tax evasion but in my line of work, I did see significant benefit fraud. That linked to fraudulent claims for disability/motability.

Increased benefits for people with mh difficulties, including drug or alcohol addiction were meant to help claimants get to appointments aimed at helping reduce dependency on substances, reduce depression and anxiety and more. Austerity largely demolished those services of course. We now have increasing numbers of people with anxiety and depression. I’ll leave that there.

Accepting poor support services have become the norm, why should X get more benefits to continue drinking or using street drugs when Y, next door gets basic benefits after recently losing their job? Why do substance or alcohol misusers qualify for motability? Yes I do understand the theoretical reasons but where is the incentive to make the necessary lifestyle changes if the result is huge loss of income. It’s an unsustainable mess that Starmer was right to attempt to address.

I don't trust Starmer on immigration - the big problem. Unfortunately, is it is going to get worse unless we sidestep the ECHR which, as his politics are so law based, will not happen.

He feels doomed.

If he is frustrated he might be best off returning to his previous job as an international lawyer. Better for him, better for you.

escaped

^When I took over as leader of the Labour Party, I said there will be sort of three phases to this^.

You've got to sort of build the fundamentals first and then you move on to the second stage.

What's with these sort of s? He sounds rather uncertain and vague.

Sounds honest. I will settle for that rather than the bluff and bluster that went before.

Luckygirl3

escaped

When I took over as leader of the Labour Party, I said there will be sort of three phases to this.

You've got to sort of build the fundamentals first and then you move on to the second stage.

What's with these sort of s? He sounds rather uncertain and vague.

Sounds honest. I will settle for that rather than the bluff and bluster that went before.

Honest maybe, but it's a known fact that the sort ofs are used in speech as filler words, a bit like the "ums" used by Boris!! It is possible to criticise both candidly.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

*Here not hear ha!

Oh I don't know FGT2 perhaps hear/here could apply. After all, he's never here to hear a lot of the time is he 😂😂

Basically, he is ineffectual.

The role of prime minister is beyond the scope of any one individual and needs to be split into foreign and home. As in France.
My preference would be for Starmer to be foreign. Out of the country!

He needs to do two things. 1: get a grip on the so-called immigration problem and resolve it so pulling the rug from under Farage's feet (and the Tories should help him), and 2: go all out for economic growth.

Grantanow

He needs to do two things. 1: get a grip on the so-called immigration problem and resolve it so pulling the rug from under Farage's feet (and the Tories should help him), and 2: go all out for economic growth.

What is your proposal for getting a "grip on" immigration?

Iam64 Good post! I don't disagree with any of it.

Benefits are a poisoned chalice for any government. Labour was/is right to take it on, but faces more difficulties than other parties because some of its own backbenchers and supporters have been seen as supporters of people receiving benefits - most of whom receive them legitimately but have been caught up with cuts.

It's hypocrisy for people who wouldn't ever vote Labour to criticise them for cuts when they, themselves, have advocated for cuts/changes.

Starmer reminds me of Canute. A person can be a brilliant king/prime minister/leader, but s/he will always face (and be beaten) by a hostile sea (media).

PS. I'm not a usual Labour voter, so I'm not entirely partisan and uncritical.