Gransnet forums

News & politics

A year of Starmer What do you think?

(617 Posts)
Grany Tue 06-Apr-21 12:38:38

A piece by Jonathan Cook an award winning journalist

www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/keir-starmer-cautious-tearing-uk-labour-party-apart

I suppose Starmer's poll ratings could improve

MaizieD Thu 08-Apr-21 09:34:53

then those members with dissenting views will leave and over time be replaced with less Far left wing views.

The thing that has both puzzled and frustrated me over the past few years is that no-one has ever clarified what these 'far left' views actually are. They just throw the stupid phrase into the discussion. It's meaningless.

Would someone please itemise exactly what these far left views are?

As a bonus they might be able to explain what is so pernicious about them...

Grany Thu 08-Apr-21 09:35:41

All I can say is the Establishment do not want a socialist government They wouldn't let Michael Foot win.

I can't say more than that really that is the way it is in this country.

There are alternate media to mainstream people are working to better change things.

lemongrove Thu 08-Apr-21 09:39:14

You don’t know what far left views are Maizie? ?
You do know of course that under Corbyn membership increased? Yes? All the closet ( and open) Marxist, Communists, and assorted far left all clamoured to join up.

lemongrove Thu 08-Apr-21 09:42:38

Grany voters know what they want, and they know what they don’t want, regardless of media coverage.They didn’t want Corbyn and all that he represented.They may want Starmer.

MaizieD Thu 08-Apr-21 10:03:34

lemongrove

You don’t know what far left views are Maizie? ?
You do know of course that under Corbyn membership increased? Yes? All the closet ( and open) Marxist, Communists, and assorted far left all clamoured to join up.

No, I don't, lemon.

How about, as the fount of all wisdom, you actually tell me, instead of throwing empty words around?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me why tory peer, Claire Fox. IRA supporter and former Revolutionary Communist, doesn't blacken the name of the tory party while you're at it..

Galaxy Thu 08-Apr-21 10:52:44

Because they dont get involved in it. They dont care as long as she is one of them. They have been in power for the majority of my life. I dont agree with pretty much anything claire fox says by the way.

PippaZ Thu 08-Apr-21 11:15:48

Yesterday I suggested that the only answer was for the opposition parties to join together. This guy says it better than I can. As it was an open letter to Keir Starmer I have copied it over.

Dear Keir,

I am 81. I have always voted Labour, or – since I now live in a Conservative/LibDem marginal – LibDem. I was a strong Remainer. My career has been mainly in public service here and abroad in the environmental sector. Now you know “where I come from”.

The Conservative Party has morphed from a centre right party into the English National Party. The name has not changed but its core philosophy has altered fundamentally. I get the impression that the Labour Party has not realised the full significance of this. And perhaps the English have been slow to see it – but it is very apparent to people living in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

One thing ought to be clear: the Labour Party cannot be a second English National Party. Waving union flags and beating jingoistic drums (albeit more softly) will never convince those who want the true thing and will embarrass and alienate those who find this kind of gesture nationalism offensive. And yet the government has been able to define this as the playing field upon which you feel you are required to operate.

Stand back and see what is happening to our politics. The government has attacked key institutions and processes that might stand in its way by illegally proroguing Parliament, breaking international law and aiming to roll back judicial review. It is threatening to restrict the rights of democratic protest. It wishes to make it more difficult for marginalised groups to vote (c.f. the Republican Party). It intimidates and undermines the independence of the BBC (as if it did not already have overwhelming and largely uncritical support from the MSM). It is ready to provoke a series of skirmishes in the ‘woke wars’ designed to keep alive the “anti-elite” resentment that played so well for Johnson et al in 2016 and 2019. It is happy to project a mildly delinquent image of the UK on the international stage in the name of sovereignty.

Many see this as the first steps towards a very British kind of fascism, or at least a drift towards a Hungary-style, one-party state. Even if you are reluctant to describe what is happening in those terms, it is clearly a deliberate and sustained assault on many of our tolerant traditions and democratic ways of working. And it is also an attempt to create the conditions in which lies, distortion and corruption go unchallenged and where our leaders use every device to avoid accountability (for COVID errors, for personal failings and policy disasters too numerous to list).

This is not politics as usual, nor can it be addressed through politics as normal. Given how our electoral system works, the Labour Party can only win power if it responds to the current crisis for British democracy by adopting a radically different way of working which completely re-sets the political landscape. In short, it needs to be bold in a way that it has – sadly – not so far shown an appetite for.

To grasp the political initiative, the Labour Party should declare that it believes there is now an unprecedented threat to our democracy which calls for unprecedented measures by all who value our democratic traditions: and that you are therefore inviting all other opposition parties – the Greens, the LibDems, the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Alliance Party, and the Social Democratic and Labour Party – to join Labour in forming an Alliance for Progressive Democracy, to confront the slide into narrow English nationalism.

Such an alliance, would be confined to democracy-related issues and would be an arrangement for the rest of this Parliament only. Basically, it would be a time-limited political truce – rather like the war-time coalition – with three specific aims:

to join together to confront the Government at every turn in Parliament, in the courts and in other ways when it threatens democratic institutions and processes. It won’t stop it, but it will make the progress of legislation more difficult and controversial.
to raise public awareness of the threats to our democracy so that it is talked about and properly covered in the MSM and on the BBC. Brexit taught us two things: a matter of marginal interest to most people before 2016 was skilfully manipulated into becoming the defining issue and fault line in UK politics; and not all politics is about bread-and-butter issues. Why wouldn’t a rallying call to ‘Defend our Democracy’ – there’s your three word slogan – achieve comparable success?
to discuss and seek agreement on the elements of constitutional change we want to see in the UK so that democracy is made safe in future. This may be no more than reaching agreement before the next election on the need for a Royal Commission on a written constitution and on a few principles for a new voting system based on Proportional Representation (PR) rather than First Past the Post (FPTP). Obviously, the pressure for a Scottish referendum will greatly complicate matters, but that is no reason not to explore the common ground with as many of the parties to the alliance as possible.
Just think how such an initiative by this group of parties might alter the political landscape. You would be setting the agenda, not following that of the government. The government would be faced with a combined opposition that would represent 57% of the 2019 vote. Public opinion would be awakened to the real threat to our rights and privileges. Many voters would respond positively to the unusual sight of parties working together. Millions, young people especially, who feel politically homeless at present would have a cause to rally to. And the ground could be laid for a winning alliance at the 2024 election.

Perhaps it is naïve to hope for a bold cross-party initiative like this, but I believe that politics as usual is not up the task of defending democracy against the threats it now faces and that it falls to the party you lead to show a different way forward.

Yours etc.

Adrian Phillips

Gossamerbeynon1945 Thu 08-Apr-21 11:16:25

I don't hate trans people, but do they belong in women's prisons and a lot of other place. Women fought hard fort single sex places, and now it seems it is going to be taken away.

I think it is basic biology

Galaxy Thu 08-Apr-21 11:24:54

Sorry but that's exactly what the labour party shouldn't do. The cognitive dissonance in that letter is incredible. We should campaign for a return to democracy whilst explaining how stupid the public were to vote Brexit. Breathtaking.

MaizieD Thu 08-Apr-21 11:34:36

Galaxy

Because they dont get involved in it. They dont care as long as she is one of them. They have been in power for the majority of my life. I dont agree with pretty much anything claire fox says by the way.

I would never think for one minute that you did agree with Fox, Galaxy.

But tories who like to glibly talk about communists and marxists in the LP seem quite happy about having one ennobled by their tory PM...

I'm not getting any enlightenment, I see...

trisher Thu 08-Apr-21 11:44:48

Gossamerbeynon1945

I don't hate trans people, but do they belong in women's prisons and a lot of other place. Women fought hard fort single sex places, and now it seems it is going to be taken away.

I think it is basic biology

The law is quite clear on this if there is a good enough reason for excluding them transpeople (even those with a GRA) can be excluded from single sex services and places. As an example if a rape crisis centre considers women wouldn't attend if transwomen were present they could be banned. The fact that it hasn't been properly applied in the past is no reason to condemn trans people.
There is now a special prison for trans people.

Gossamerbeynon1945 Thu 08-Apr-21 11:45:12

Were you aware that the Green Party call women "non men", and Plaid Cymry agree!

PippaZ Thu 08-Apr-21 11:55:15

Galaxy

Sorry but that's exactly what the labour party shouldn't do. The cognitive dissonance in that letter is incredible. We should campaign for a return to democracy whilst explaining how stupid the public were to vote Brexit. Breathtaking.

My goodness "cognitive dissonance" indeed. I can't see anywhere where he says KS should explain "how stupid the public were to vote Brexit" and I can't see any conflicting attitudes - except, perhaps, with yours.

He is putting forward what he thinks the LP should do and I feel it is worth considering. You don't but I don't think the makes it "Breathtaking".

You are doing what another member always does on this forum and attacking without either explanation or suggestion of an alternative and this does not add anything to the debate; it's just a personal attack.

Casdon Thu 08-Apr-21 12:01:04

Okay MaizieD you did ask, this is my opinion. Most of the voting public distrust what they would class as ‘extremism’ in any form, they are essentially conservative with a small ‘c’. Many support socialist principles in a watered down form, but they don’t trust pacifists, they don’t espouse measures which make sweeping steps towards the elimination of unfairness in society even when they are themselves victims because it’s not how they see the world or themselves, although incremental change is palatable, and they value leaders who they perceive to be articulate and principled - but they also want some charisma. Many believe press and social media reports, they don’t care enough to delve beneath the headlines. It’s pointless railing at the press and social media, they are what they are - lies can be challenged, but once said mud sticks. It’s far more effective to try to win them over.

There are many people who are very passionate about politics, but they aren’t, and won’t ever be in the majority, in fact they turn other people off. That’s what Starmer has recognised and is using to develop a slightly left of centre agenda - it’s the only way to challenge the Tories that has a chance of succeeding.

Whitewavemark2 Thu 08-Apr-21 12:05:00

Labour members asked if Starmer was better or worse than Corbyn

Better 61%
Worse 29%
You gov Mch 2021

growstuff Thu 08-Apr-21 12:15:02

The very last thing anybody should do is try to persuade people they were stupid to vote for Brexit. I might think it to myself and I do certainly regret it, but it happened and I genuinely think the country needs to find a way of making the best of a bad job. You cannot tell people they were stupid for doing something they did in good faith - let them find out for themselves what the consequences are. Meanwhile, make sure that nothing else is used as a scapegoat. I only wish the majority of people were more politically clued up and understood what's going on, but I can't force them to do that.

As for a coalition ...

I've thought about and I don't think it would work. I am a paid up member of the LibDems, but I wish for a Labour government. So why don't I join the Labour Party? I've certainly thought about it, but my constituency is a solid Conservative seat. At a national level it doesn't matter what I vote, but it does matter at local level, where we do have some very effective LibDem councillors and I will continue to support them. Labour doesn't even get a look in round here.

I think that a national level the handful of LibDems and Greens (Caroline Lucas) would run the risk of losing their seats if they went into coalition with Labour and would deny people a choice. People vote LibDem in national elections for a reason and they don't want a Labour MP. If they did, they'd vote Labour. In practice, most of the opposition parties vote with Labour against the government anyway.

growstuff Thu 08-Apr-21 12:17:12

Whitewavemark2

Labour members asked if Starmer was better or worse than Corbyn

Better 61%
Worse 29%
You gov Mch 2021

The trouble is that most voters aren't Labour members.

In the last general election, only 14% of over 60s voted Labour - and they're the people most likely to vote and currently the biggest population group. How does Labour win some of them back?

growstuff Thu 08-Apr-21 12:20:28

I agree with you Casdon and have saved me writing yet another post.

Some people in the Labour Party have recognised that voters don't want to be linked to a party which associates itself with benefits, unemployment and a so-called "woke" agenda. They want positivity and hope and that's what Johnson is currently dishing out.

Dinahmo Thu 08-Apr-21 12:25:30

When Tony Blair was PM he had Alistair Campbell as his spokesperson and press secretary. By all accounts, if there were factual errors in the press he would be banging on the doors of the erroneous newspaper's offices. I think he was known as a bit of a bully at the time.

The LP doesn't stand up for itself. Last night my OH watched the LP party political broadcast with KS sitting on a bench talking about how wonderful the NHS had been during the pandemic. What he should be saying is that the Tories never wanted the NHS, voted against it several times and that even Thatcher wanted it privatised. She didn't do that because her minister told her that the public wouldn't stand for it.

The other untruth is that Gordon Brown's policies caused the financial crash. As everybody should know it had its origins in the US with the sub-prime mortgage crisis, which followed on from the unregulated use of derivatives (ie futures, options, forwards and swaps).

By October 2008 the world's financial system was on the verge of a systematic crash. All the indices were crashing - everywhere, not just the UK. By 10 October major depositors were threatening to withdraw all their funds from RBS and other British banks despite the threat of severe financial penalties.

Treasury officials confirmed that RBS and HBOS would be unable to open their doors the following Monday morning. There would be a chain reaction leading to most other British banks which would in turn affect nearly everyone in the UK. Cash machines wouldn't work, Cheques would be valueless, credit cards would be useless. People would not be able to buy food.

If you don't believe me, cast your minds back to September 2007 and the collapse of Northern Rock. Remember the queues outside its offices all over the country as people tried to take their money out? It so happened that we had over £250k on deposit with them left over from the sale of our house. I was certain that the govt would bail them out but my OH, not being the financial half of our marriage was extremely worried. I tried to transfer the funds on the Friday evening but couldn't get through. At 7.55am the next morning I sat at my computer and dead on the dot of 8.00am I was able to transfer our funds. I was right - the government did bail them out but it was the first British bank to fail in decades.

That weekend GB was touring the country explaining why the banks were being supported. Alastair Darling (Chancellor) was in America with Mervyn King (B of E) for a meeting of the G7 finance ministers. Darling spent the weekend persuading the finance ministers and GB persuading the European heads of state that recapitalising the banks with public money was the only way out. And they succeeded.

The UK was saved a devastating financial crash and GB was vilified by the Tories who used it as an excuse to bring in 10 years of austerity when they came to power. The LP should be shouting about this from the roof tops.

If anyone is interested, there is an excellent film, Margin Call, about the actions taken by a bank over one weekend in New York during the sub prime crash. It was filmed over about 2 weeks in the recently vacated offices of a collapsed trading company

trisher Thu 08-Apr-21 12:26:32

Actually it is 14% of over 70s. 22% of those between 60-69 voted Labour.
yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/12/17/how-britain-voted-2019-general-election

trisher Thu 08-Apr-21 12:31:52

Gossamerbeynon1945

Were you aware that the Green Party call women "non men", and Plaid Cymry agree!

Does that mean they call transmen "non women"? I think it shows a distinct inability to recognise how important equality is, and that is how patriachy prospers. In Apartheid systems black people were termed "non-white"

Gossamerbeynon1945 Thu 08-Apr-21 12:38:39

Don't know what they call transmen.

I think we will agree to differ, I have no idea who to vote for, and I liked Keir Starmer before he made the statement that TWAW.

Iam64 Thu 08-Apr-21 12:55:29

Casdon

Okay MaizieD you did ask, this is my opinion. Most of the voting public distrust what they would class as ‘extremism’ in any form, they are essentially conservative with a small ‘c’. Many support socialist principles in a watered down form, but they don’t trust pacifists, they don’t espouse measures which make sweeping steps towards the elimination of unfairness in society even when they are themselves victims because it’s not how they see the world or themselves, although incremental change is palatable, and they value leaders who they perceive to be articulate and principled - but they also want some charisma. Many believe press and social media reports, they don’t care enough to delve beneath the headlines. It’s pointless railing at the press and social media, they are what they are - lies can be challenged, but once said mud sticks. It’s far more effective to try to win them over.

There are many people who are very passionate about politics, but they aren’t, and won’t ever be in the majority, in fact they turn other people off. That’s what Starmer has recognised and is using to develop a slightly left of centre agenda - it’s the only way to challenge the Tories that has a chance of succeeding.

This
And to this the accurate comments by many on this thread about the JAM who see neighbours living on benefits, whilst they work insecure, minimum wage jobs.

Doodledog Thu 08-Apr-21 13:09:54

To get the support of older people, Labour could get rid of the means tests on social care, which plunges those who have saved into poverty whilst those who have not are given the same care free.

They could make sure that people who have paid NI contributions are guaranteed higher pensions than those who have not, and ensure that employers have to pay contributions for employees whose hourly rate is too low. It is wrong that someone working a full week is excluded from pensions and benefits because their wages are too low, and also wrong that people who have worked all their lives are no better off in retirement than those who have not.

They could stop the closure of local NHS units (and re-open the ones which have been systematically sold off) that used to provide nursing care and rehabilitation for patients who no longer need clinical care (so-called 'bed blockers') so that they can recover from falls, strokes etc before going home, instead of being discharged from hospital into care homes which cost them their life savings if they have any.

None of the above is 'sexy' or headline grabbing, but they are all measures which would provide older people with security and level the playing field for people who have worked all their lives, and would appeal to the 'JAM' people in later life.

Galaxy Thu 08-Apr-21 13:18:24

It's not a personal attack. I disagree with his views on what the labour party should do. He thinks there is an attack on democracy (which I agree with) whilst stating that the democratic decision made by the public on Brexit was due to manipulation, etc etc. The only democracy he seems to be interested in is one that reflects his own views. The lib dems stood on a platform of overturning the Brexit vote ( I am a remainer with a parent who is European and has had to go through the process to remain) that's an attack on democracy. I think he also makes the mistake of thinking that the lib dems and labour are similar, nothing could be farther from the truth in my view. To be fair that's an easy mistake to make, I think lots of mps who left the labour party made that error.