Should Starmer sue Sunak?

Galaxy

He has handled the issue badly, I mean in general not specifically in this instance, but let's face it, it's quite rare that people handle the issue well. I was relieved to see the Lords discussing it as adults yesterday.

Who handled the issue badly?

The PM who didn't have the nous to leave a potentially sensitive jibe out of his script or the LOTO who was clearly taken aback and disgusted by the inappropriateness of it?

If Mollygo and Oreo seriously think that Starmer is in any way rattled by Rishi's accusations they have clearly never watched PMQs. It has happened week after week ever since Starmer became LOTO. It's a boring irrelevance.

Rising not raising

Oreo

It’s the only way to interpret the incident, and any twisting is done just by you MaizieD.
Starmer was clearly rattled by the accusations on his flip flopping and indecisiveness on certain things and quickly spotted a way to try and turn it around by bringing Mrs Ghey into it.
I know there’s an election coming up and I’ll be voting for him to become the next PM, with a few reservations it has to be said, but seeing him do this made me cringe.

I don’t understand though how people can excuse Sunak for making that particular jibe when he had previously been informed that Brianna’s mother would be there. He’s either deaf, or tone deaf. That isn’t any more okay than Starmer raising to the bait.

He has handled the issue badly, I mean in general not specifically in this instance, but let's face it, it's quite rare that people handle the issue well. I was relieved to see the Lords discussing it as adults yesterday.

It’s the only way to interpret the incident, and any twisting is done just by you MaizieD.
Starmer was clearly rattled by the accusations on his flip flopping and indecisiveness on certain things and quickly spotted a way to try and turn it around by bringing Mrs Ghey into it.
I know there’s an election coming up and I’ll be voting for him to become the next PM, with a few reservations it has to be said, but seeing him do this made me cringe.

Keep saying that. MaizieD. It won’t change who said what.

But the fact is it’s a sad twisted way to look at it without acknowledging that Starmer made it about Brianna by drawing attention to Brianna’s mother.
Sunak, though I think he was wrong to add that u turn to the list on that day, was pointing out the harm done to females including all those females who were in the House, (including Mrs Ghey) that day, by someone who is head of the Labour Party.

Mollygo

Quite easily Maisie. I said earlier on the thread that Sunak adding the mention of Starmer’s inability or unwillingness to acknowledge what a woman is to the list of his U turns was not a good idea.
But who mentioned Brianna, or Brianna’s mother?
Starmer or Sunak?
Starmer made it about her.

What a sad and twisted way of interpreting the incident.

Greta

Curtaintwitcher, just replace 'Starmer' from your post with 'Sunak' and see how well it reads.

Starmer has ethics

Curtaintwitcher, just replace 'Starmer' from your post with 'Sunak' and see how well it reads.

Duped in what way? curtaintwitcher

He is just reminding everyone what a slippery person Starmer is. He takes advantage of any opportunity for personal gain, whatever the ethics. At the moment he's fishing for votes and says whatever he thinks will gain the support of the electorate. I'm sure anyone who votes Starmer into office will soon realise how duped they have been.

Mollygo

Quite easily Maisie. I said earlier on the thread that Sunak adding the mention of Starmer’s inability or unwillingness to acknowledge what a woman is to the list of his U turns was not a good idea.
But who mentioned Brianna, or Brianna’s mother?
Starmer or Sunak?
Starmer made it about her.

Number 10 however were clearly very agitated at Sunak’s performance and saw the whole debacle as a result of his abysmal lack of political astuteness .

Sunak simply isn’t a good political performer, he can’t think on his feet and is tin eared.

Starmer spoke the names

Quite easily Maisie. I said earlier on the thread that Sunak adding the mention of Starmer’s inability or unwillingness to acknowledge what a woman is to the list of his U turns was not a good idea.
But who mentioned Brianna, or Brianna’s mother?
Starmer or Sunak?
Starmer made it about her.

Starmer didn't drag Brianna's name into anything. He made reference to her mother, who was supposedly in the gallery, in his opening remarks.

This week the unwavering bravery of Brianna Ghey’s mother, Esther, has touched us all. As a father, I can’t even imagine the pain that she’s going through and I’m glad that she’s with us in the gallery here today”.

After Rishie's scripted outburst he was plainly very angry, saying

Of all the weeks to say that – when Brianna’s mother is in this chamber. Shame”

How anyone can twist that into 'dragging Brianna's name into it' is beyond my comprehension.

Iam64

Starmer is an astute politician who knows the law

Shame he wasn’t astute enough not to drag Brianna’s name into it, whilst criticising Sunak (who didn’t).

Starmer is an astute politician who knows the law

So to clarify, is it all a bit of a storm in a teacup, or am I misreading the situation?

I don’t think Starmer will sue Sunak anyway. I don’t think politicians usually do that. They seem to take the rough with the smooth as far as I can see. I’m sure Starmer knows he will be our next PM and it wouldn’t look good. He wouldn’t want to enter office with a messy court case hanging over his head. He’s not Prince Harry. He’s more dignified.

Hope you feel better soon Iam.
Lots of people on Gransnet have said they’ve had this horrible virus/infection.

Oh my, I’ve just read my last post - awful! Your instead of you’re. Worse, ‘obstruct counsel’ when it should have said ‘instruct counsel’.

I’m off to take my 2nd antibiotic and hope when I return tomorrow, to be functioning a little better.
Thanks again for kind comments - I seem to have that thing everyone has complained of. 16 day cold type virus that moved slowly into infection.

Iam64

Callistemon - I may have two threads confused ?
I’m on the sofa taking antibiotics and feeling thick headed.

Oh dear!

I don't know if it was the other thread but hope you feel better soon. 🌻

Iam64 I wish you a speedy recovery 🌼

Thank you Gernanshepherdsmum

Thanks for the kind thoughts folks.
GSM thank you for confirming the reasons a barrister can refuse a case.
Your right about favourites, though maybe it’s also accurate to say people hope to obstruct counsel with particular experience or expertise

Sorry to hear you’re not well Iam, and hope you still feel better.

A barrister can only refuse a case if he isn’t going to be free, has a conflict of interest or wouldn’t be appropriately remunerated. If a client is refused on any of those grounds there are always plenty of others who can be approached. Criminal law solicitors will have their ‘favourites’, just as with any other field of law.