advertisement


Labour Leader: Keir Starmer II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seanm said:
Hey, it’s your turn to have a go! I’m not going to stop you. But I’m also not going to deny myself a chuckle or two as people who’ve been spent the last 5 years lecturing the left about realism are forced to face a few unpleasant facts.
Click to expand...

What would they be? I'm very disappointed with Starmer's recent strategy but your comment has you confiming the stereotype of the left. That they have more of a problem being part of an opposition that don't share your views to the letter, than you do with the Tories. What would you have had Starmer do today?
 
Tony L said:
It is funny how Labour “leaders” seem able to express an articulate opinion from the back benches, but become duplicitous cowards and ideological vacuums once placed in any position of real responsibility or scruitiny. Both Corbyn and Starmer followed the exact same trajectory from initially credible to beyond useless. Likely another indication the party as a political institution is structurally dysfunctional. It isn’t even the politics of the past. It is just nothing. An irrelevant background noise.
Click to expand...
This is not unique to Labour. Jeremy Hunt has been hailed as a beacon of good sense by some. John Major, lauded outside of office etc.

But yes, once out of office they tend to speak more freely.
 
ks.234 said:
oppose
Click to expand...

Yes, me too. But whip against, free vote, abstain? I get that Sean thinks Brexit is unimportant, but there is a significant power grab in there too. I'm kind of more surprised that the opposition have made so little of that given democracy was much mentioned by Leavers. Unless that meant a vote on the terms, natch.
 
SteveS1 said:
Yes, me too. But whip against, free vote, abstain? I get that Sean thinks Brexit is unimportant, but there is a significant power grab in there too. I'm kind of more surprised that the opposition have made so little of that given that democracy was much mentioned by Leavers.
Click to expand...
To be honest just a bit of leadership would look good. Just stand up and call this deal out, subject it to his famous forensic scrutiny, pull it to pieces with his legendary analytic prowess and his lawyerly grasp of detail and let others take his lead
 
AIUI, once the ERG were onboard there was zero chance of the vote going against, so Starmer could have opposed, allowed a free vote, or abstained, and could have said "Brexit is a Tory thing, and is theirs alone".
 
gavreid said:
Only a single Labour MP voted against today
Click to expand...

That really is absolutely pathetic. What a total waste of space they are. I resent paying tax to fund Labour MP’s wages if they are not doing their job as a party of opposition and scrutiny.
 
Tony L said:
That really is absolutely pathetic. What a total waste of space they are. I resent paying tax to fund Labour MP’s wages if they are not doing their job as a party of opposition and scrutiny.
Click to expand...

Their job was to say it's your shit show - own it. I don't even think Labour is serious about defending workers rights - actually the EU is playing this quite cutely, they will cut workers rights too using the excuse of being competitive with the UK.
 
PsB said:
Good statement from Corbyn, comfortably settling back in his old role of opposition to the leadership of his party in addition to lobbing a few at BoJo.
Click to expand...
Yes, he is freer to speak now but there is an underlying consistency: as Labour Party leader, Corbyn wished to respect the referendum vote, while limiting the damage to workers' rights, environmental standards etc = soft Brexit. I don't think he communicated that very well and he was unable to carry the PLP and others with him, but it was a credible and principled position. His statement today reaffirms it, so it should come as no surprise that he abstained on the deal.

In contrast, Starmer's actions,when contrasted with his vocal support for a second referendum etc. show him to be an unprincipled charlatan.
 
SteveS1 said:
What would they be? I'm very disappointed with Starmer's recent strategy but your comment has you confiming the stereotype of the left. That they have more of a problem being part of an opposition that don't share your views to the letter, than you do with the Tories. What would you have had Starmer do today?
Click to expand...
Ha! Some people can't pass up the opportunity to indulge in stereotypes of the left, it hardly matters what we do or say. I'm not the one excoriating Starmer for not sharing my views to the letter am I. No! I'm the one laughing unkindly at others for, among other things, not liking the taste of own pragmatism medicine. Keith can compromise all day long on this as far as I'm concerned!
 
Starmer was afraid to abstain in case he upset the Brexit voters , many of whom would vote labour in the future . However abstaining would show he was not against Brexit but the BURNT in the oven deal was very poor , easily backed up by some rhetoric and would not have stopped the bill passing
 
droodzilla said:
Yes, he is freer to speak now but there is an underlying consistency: as Labour Party leader, Corbyn wished to respect the referendum vote, while limiting the damage to workers' rights, environmental standards etc = soft Brexit. I don't think he communicated that very well and he was unable to carry the PLP and others with him, but it was a credible and principled position. His statement today reaffirms it, so it should come as no surprise that he abstained on the deal.

In contrast, Starmer's actions,when contrasted with his vocal support for a second referendum etc. show him to be an unprincipled charlatan.
Click to expand...
Perhaps Starmer learned from Corbyn’s mistakes & felt it wasn’t worth wasting further energy on? To be honest I have lost track of this as I thought it was Starmer who was behind the soft Brexit & confirmatory referendum. This went down about as well as cold sick at the last election.

As you stated it is far easier to say what should be done rather than actually getting it done; the latter involves pulling together a disparate party.

I don’t think Starmer has covered himself in glory here though, far from it.
 
Woodface said:
I don’t think Starmer has covered himself in glory here though, far from it.
Click to expand...

He made a decision to make and he opted for a bold one. Abstaining or a free vote would have been easier since it would not have upset as many of his supporters and would have been more inline with his previously stated views. Few here agreed with his reasoning including myself but a fair bit of it involves predicting how the general public will tend to view our relationship with Europe over the next 4 years. He might have called it right (I don't think he has) but we will have to see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top