It is very difficult for a party to "oppose" a party in power that does not have any policies - and the New Tories don't.

But why does he need these populist policies now? We are years away from an election and he has a huge majority.

I don't think he sees it as years away. One bit of their manifesto they do seem keen to follow is abolishing the Fixed Term Parliament Act.

I don't think this is any different to how it's always been. Parties want voters and will do their best to get them. Only by gaining the majority of voters can they win. If they don't get them they lose, and no-one wants to lose.
People who sit behind their keyboards criticising all the time should maybe have been a politician themselves to show everyone how it should be done.

Chestnut on an anonymous forum, how do you know that no one is or has been a politician.

Chestnut

I don't think this is any different to how it's always been. Parties want voters and will do their best to get them. Only by gaining the majority of voters can they win. If they don't get them they lose, and no-one wants to lose.
People who sit behind their keyboards criticising all the time should maybe have been a politician themselves to show everyone how it should be done.

Wrong again Chestnut

They can win by gaining support of the MINORITY of voters.

At the last general election most of those who voted voted AGAINST the Tory Party and because of our totaslly undemocratic First Past The Post electoral system they won an eighty seat majority in the HoC.

This is a sham democracy.

Ilovecheese

Chestnut on an anonymous forum, how do you know that no one is or has been a politician.

My thoughts entirely Ilovecheese

Because, if they had been a politician do you seriously think they wouldn’t have been oh so keen to let us know??

Of course they have policies btw ridiculous to think otherwise.

lemongrove

Because, if they had been a politician do you seriously think they wouldn’t have been oh so keen to let us know??

Judging by your own standards, lemon?

If you'd been a politician perhaps you might have been dying to let us all know, but perhaps other people feel differently about what they might disclose on an internet forum.

Or just not be so up themselves that they have to let everyone know how important they are or have been...

Of course, where does 'politician' begin? Parish councillor? Town or District councillor? County councillor? MP,? Cabinet minister? PM?

lemongrove

Of course they have policies btw ridiculous to think otherwise.

One of their policies, as per their manifesto, was to retain Overseas Aid at 0.7% of GDP.

varian

Chestnut

I don't think this is any different to how it's always been. Parties want voters and will do their best to get them. Only by gaining the majority of voters can they win. If they don't get them they lose, and no-one wants to lose.
People who sit behind their keyboards criticising all the time should maybe have been a politician themselves to show everyone how it should be done.

Wrong again Chestnut

They can win by gaining support of the MINORITY of voters.

At the last general election most of those who voted voted AGAINST the Tory Party and because of our totaslly undemocratic First Past The Post electoral system they won an eighty seat majority in the HoC.

This is a sham democracy.

Totally agree Varian, Whilst we have the 'first past the post' system, we live in very undemocratic country, in which the political party in power rarely has the support ofthe majority of the voters.
I would also like to see compulsory voting, with the option on the ballot paper of 'None of the above'.

However, part of the problem at present is the the main opposition party has little or few policies (except for working hmard at getting rid of most of their own hard-working members).

If Starmar was less concerned about 'wallpaper' and more concerned about peoples jobs, eviction, minimum wage, stopping the privitisation of the NHS, etc. then he might be getting a little more support

A surreal world in which a government who is led by a man who is a serial adulterer, a serial lier, and who happily hands out millions of pounds of governement contracts to his mates, even when those mates are unable to make those contracts work - still has so much support.

If Starmar was less concerned about 'wallpaper' and more concerned about peoples jobs, eviction, minimum wage, stopping the privitisation of the NHS, etc. then he might be getting a little more support

What he wants doesn't exactly get much publicity, does it? I didn't see reports of his recent speech to the GMB plastered across the front pages; it's not as newsworthy as wallpaper or infighting..

This 'may' address some of your concerns. Naturally it's focussed on work because of the audience. There will be others.

labourlist.org/2021/06/starmers-gmb-speech-on-gary-smith-uber-deal-mclibel-fire-and-rehire/

Not quite on topic but -

"Michael Gove acted unlawfully when the government awarded a contract without a tender last March to a polling company owned by long-term associates of his and Dominic Cummings, then Boris Johnson’s chief adviser, a judge has ruled.

Mrs Justice O’Farrell, who gave the ruling on the Cabinet Office contract with the company Public First, said: “The decision of 5 June 2020 to award the contract to Public First gave rise to apparent bias and was unlawful.”

The ruling is the first in a series of judicial review legal challenges brought by the Good Law Project (GLP) against government Covid-19 contracts awarded with no competitive tenders under emergency regulations."

Taken from the Guardian today.

A big hurrah from me.

No wonder the government is so desperate to curtail Judicial Review. It is the only tool a citizen has at the moment to hold them to account.

The GLP is crowdfunded (and a lot of people are funding them). It seems that the government also would like to curtail the use of crowd funding. What a surprise...

Yes, MaizieD. Where is our democracy going? We need to be able to hold politicians to account but this government seems determined to block this very effective route.

If Starmar was less concerned about 'wallpaper' ... ...

This is not a thread about some Mr Starmar or even Starmer. It about the governments manipulation of the electorate and how they are achieving it.

Dinahmo

Not quite on topic but -

"Michael Gove acted unlawfully when the government awarded a contract without a tender last March to a polling company owned by long-term associates of his and Dominic Cummings, then Boris Johnson’s chief adviser, a judge has ruled.

Mrs Justice O’Farrell, who gave the ruling on the Cabinet Office contract with the company Public First, said: “The decision of 5 June 2020 to award the contract to Public First gave rise to apparent bias and was unlawful.”

The ruling is the first in a series of judicial review legal challenges brought by the Good Law Project (GLP) against government Covid-19 contracts awarded with no competitive tenders under emergency regulations."

Taken from the Guardian today.

A big hurrah from me.

Another attempt to manipulate democracy and then tell us, with their smoke and mirrors, that we are wrong to think they are scamming us all. Brilliant result - well done The Good Law Project.

Nandalot

Yes, MaizieD. Where is our democracy going? We need to be able to hold politicians to account but this government seems determined to block this very effective route.

Yes, this is another sinister potential development that is being slipped out while all the Margarets in the shires wet themselves about Oxford students voting to remove a painting of the Queen from their wall.

As usual I watched PMQT and all Johnson did was play for laughs. Even during a world pandemic it’s all he can do. I do think the speaker, at one point, asked him to answer the question but I may have been dreaming it.

I'm sure that many of you will be cheered to see this, if you don't already know about it

OpenDemocracy has won a significant legal victory against the UK government. The judgement forces transparency on a secretive unit accused of ‘blacklisting’ Freedom of Information requests from journalists, campaigners and others.

After a three-year battle, judge Chris Hughes found that the documents the Cabinet Office presented in court about the controversial Clearing House unit were ‘misleading’. He added that there is a “profound lack of transparency about the operation”, which might “extend to ministers”.

www.opendemocracy.net/en/freedom-of-information/foi-clearing-house-michael-gove-cabinet-office-opendemocracy-wins-court-case-uk-government/

Mind you, I think those pesky 'activist lawyers' are on the government's list, too.. They don't have a very high opinion of judges who give judgements against them.

Fascism, here we come..

(Sorry to derail your thread, Pippa)

MayBee70

As usual I watched PMQT and all Johnson did was play for laughs. Even during a world pandemic it’s all he can do. I do think the speaker, at one point, asked him to answer the question but I may have been dreaming it.

I didn't watch it, but followed some of the twitter comments.

Dan Hodges declared that Johnson had 'won' PMQs. Is 'winning' now defined by an outstanding ability to not answer questions? What rabbit hole have right wing commentators fallen down?

It’s the ability to get more laughs. And get members of your own party to ask silly time wasting questions (pretty please PM will you find time to visit my constituency to see the new sports centre)that are irrelevant when there are so many important issues that need discussing. Theresa May was very good again.

Not derailing it at all Maizie. It is as I don't mind repeating, Another attempt to manipulate democracy and then tell us, with their smoke and mirrors, that we are wrong to think they are scamming us all. Brilliant result - well done The Good Law Project.

They have a policy. To keep in power whatever the cost.