I asked a question of Keir Starmer on LBC this morning. It was, near enough, this:
Thanks for taking my call.
What I know from my discussions with business people is that almost all of them want a delay to the Brexit process. They are already struggling with Covid. And they know that the extra stress from Brexit could kill their businesses.
So my question is will you now demand a delay in the Brexit transition process, come what may, to just let business, our economy and our food supply chains have a chance?
And if not, why not, because surely this is now as important as Covid in ensuring that our country keeps functioning?
I regret to say that Keir Starmer ducked the question. He said that Brexit was decided upon, he hoped for a deal, and there was nothing he could do about it now. What is more, he said that business just want a deal - which is emphatically not true, as I know.
I got a brief follow up to make clear that he had not addressed my issues. But I did not get the chance to make clear that he could demand action to help business at a PMQ session. And that was a shame.
Was I impressed by the answer? No, to be candid. It was exactly what a government minister might have given. And that is not what I expect of a Leader of the Opposition. No wonder Labour is struggling to get ahead in the polls.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
What would your proposal be? To extend the transition for another year, say?
I think that would be a good idea (actually, I think it would be a good idea to change our minds and give up on the whole damn thing) – and I suspect the EU might even grant a request of that sort, even though they already gave the UK the ability to ask for an extension which the UK declined to use – but I doubt it would get any traction in Parliament with its large government majority.
The question for Starmer is whether he wants to spend political capital on symbolically relitigating a matter that (since the last general election) is largely “done” and that he is powerless to change. Opposition you might call it.
A minimum of six months would be my suggestion
A year would be better
It may then have a chance of working
Exactly Richard. Exactly. What an utter waste.
I am not surprised. The current tactic is to keep a low profile and take advantage of events – hence abstaining, and not opposing. Labour’s reversion to the ‘managerial’ politician was a mistake, I believe. Sir Keir’s campaign for leadership was disengenuous, and now we pay the price. I was listening to an interview with Bill Mitchell yesterday. He was buoying up the presenter, who was in despair about the situation in the US with voters having to choose between Trump and Biden, both terrible candidates for those who support MMT-based policies. Mitchell’s advice was to keep on educating (top marks for you!) and to emphasis working class ethic of solidarity and collectivity. Labour will not do this as it would empower the left, which they have successfully crushed.
The idea of appearing to be neutral on certain issues, and in other areas having migrated rightwards, to make the Labour party more electable is risky and dubious.
I wonder what they imagine they will do if put in a position to form a government. Backtracking on positions won’t go down well in some areas and in others neither will taking the party further right than Blair did.
Their only hope might well be that everyone gets worn out by the endless incompetence of Boris and his chums, suffer a huge swoon followed by collective amnesia.
I can see why he is cautious on this – the usual screaming headlines about denying the will of the people. But I think there will indeed be a delay – the govt will pretend it’s an ‘implentation period’ for a very thin trade deal , not a ‘transition’. Business is desperate for it.
Brexit was a disaster for Labour. It seemed to blindside the party during the campaign, triggered a coup attempt when the result came in and left the Corbyn leadership in a perpetual state of confusion about how to deal with it. They never found a good answer.
Starmer is just being pragmatic. I suspect that even if there was a chance of pushing a “Remain-ish” position he wouldn’t take it. Having lost the battle for good in 2019 he’s not going to take on the British public again over the same losing position. (And transition extension is basically a Remainer position).
(And it’s pure political calculation from Starmer – he was always the most pro-Remain, pro-People’s Vote of Corbyn’s front bench).
It’s a complete disaster – putting hordes of middle aged lorry drivers into car parks and queues seems like a covid explosion waiting to happen but with the Tory majority it’s a losing battle to fight this. So many Tories have staked their professional and political integrity on wanting Brexit and delivering it that they can’t revolt and derail what the government are doing. In many cases they can’t accept reality because their careers are so invested in an opposite outcome.
We’re at the stage where the only thing to do is sit back, munch popcorn, and watch the disaster unfold.
The coup attempt would have happened anyway. Corbyn’s party opponents represent the usual blend of half-hearted, careerist social democracy that has or is failing in every front-rank country.
“the Corbyn leadership in a perpetual state of confusion about how to deal with it”
I don’t accept this to be correct. Corbyn was very clear after the vote, that A50 should be triggered and a deal worked out. The run up to the vote and after it was used, cynically, by Starmer and the rest of the PLP, to oust Corbyn. Their dishonesty has led us directly to where we are now – they are as culpable as Johnson.
Starmer is useless, as are the shadow front bench – not a spine between them. The sooner Labour is killed off, the better.
I agree with you on Corbyn, Starmer is useless and we have gone back to a managerial consensus – to the age of nightmares and its power on all of us. Look up the documentary called The power of nightmares and you will see where Starmer is coming from.
He is not speaking to the public, he is talking to the British Elite, ie the civil service, the military, the media, the bankers’ et al. He says I am one of you, I am no very different, I just want to manage the system not change it. That is why he is keeping quiet, he does not want to upset them and hopes the establishment get rid of Johnson, who wants to get rid of them and revolutionize the system for his mates.
Corbyn on the other hand wanted to save capitalism and the neoliberal brand, but he wanted to do a Roosevelt, to fund massive programs to get the NHS working, to give us all a new deal but the public and the establishment said bog off.
Now we have two loons in power. Starmer and Johnson have a love fest while thousands die. We are walking into a tyranny – with an echo of rights and democracy. The echo is getting more distant as we speak and the rule of law will one day be a silent whisper.
I am nit a fan of Starmer right now
But you do overstate your case by equating him with Johnson
They are not alike and it makes no sense to suggest that they are
Thank you for helping to confirm my feelings about the Labour party.
We are on our own and we need a new progressive party in this country I’m afraid and the LLL (lily-livered Left) we’ve put up with so long has to pushed a side.
Labour – they’re toast – but what is worst are the substitutes that will fill the void – Farage, BREXIT and God only knows what else.
PSR
Sir Keir and Labour in general are doing what I expected. They are following the Tony Blair/New Labour playbook to get elected. Ditching principle and playing to the crowd. As much as I hate this and believe there is benefit to a principled opposition even if it never gets elected, I don’t think a split in the Labour party and a “new progressive party of the left” is beneficial. The progressive already outnumbers the conservative. It is the bifurcation of the progressive and the first past the post system that keeps them from power. Splitting the vote further will not help. Better to try to unify the progressive.
But you are assuming that will work, remember this, Corbyn nearly won in 2017. You might think oh what rubbish, but not the establishment. They know how close it was and how it might happen again.
THAT TERRIFIES THEM.
It is only a matter of time for someone like Corbyn with better political skills to make it happen. People said but he lost yes he did but what he achieved, was remarkable, and that will be remembered in history for a very long time. The history books will say Corbyn was well beaten in 2019 but ……. what he did in 2017 was astonishing, with all his enemies, the media, the establishment, and his own party against him and he nearly did it. Think about it. History will not forget.
I think that both of you make valid points.
But can you see Labour being less tribal than they are? I can’t. A unified progressive front? Sorry – never in a month of Sundays. Labour are a true British institution – they just can’t abide sharing power.
But (No.2) – whose economic script are they using – the orthodox or heterodox one? It sounds to me that they orthodox and nothing else.
If you want to know the effects of that, look at the American Democratic party. Consider how around 60 million of the U.S. population vote Republican and 60 million vote Democrat but (No.3) over 90 million DO NOT VOTE AT ALL. Why? Because they smell the bullshit – they know something is wrong.
And whose fault is that? Is a democracy that settles for that, a democracy?
I keep hearing polls about the British and American societies being more Left leaning than their Governments all of the time.
So what is going on with Labour?
What is it? Swing voter-ism? I will not be voting until I see a potential Government that is concerned about my concerns. The voter should go on strike, in my view. We need to de-legitimise their idea of a democracy.
That’s me anyway – I withdrawn my consent to be ruled by any of them. They are mostly shit. Tory, Labour and Lib-Dem.
And the Greens are just another version of the ‘Oh we care so much’ brigade who are all compassion without the technical know how of how to run fiscal policy. And until they buy into MMT, Green New Deal, PQE – and I mean the technicalities of it, then their compassion will just remain hand-wringing at the side lines of this never ending shit show we are in.
Sorry – a bit dark I know, but there you are.
I can understand him not wanting to be caught by Brexit – but I do want to hear what he really thinks and he does urgently need to nail his ‘colours to the mast’.
Keir Starmer needs to be very careful it is so easy to be laid open to attack that the “Make Labour Great Again” masks what an increasing number of Americans are coming to realise that Trump’s electioneering slogan “Make America Great Again” masked a hidden truth it was always much more about “Make Me Great Again!” This has become especially apparent when Trump’s bombastic and manic behaviour is coupled with his niece Mary Trump, a clinical psychologist, revealing in her book and TV interviews that Donald Trump had an appalling childhood and consequently is deeply insecure. This is not to say that Starmer had an insecure childhood but is in fact masking the reality his views are actually that of a closet Conservative.
Milliband 2; beige in tooth and claw.
Would a Brexit delay be a good idea? Yes, of course.
But the REAL question is “if Keir Starmer called for a Brexit delay would it make any difference?”…. and sadly, the answer is no.
Consequently, I will cut him more slack to play a “long game”….. at least for a while.
I DO want a Labour Party that expounds clear policies but I understand the unwillingness to revisit Brexit.
But I made clear I was not revisiting Brexit
I was discussing keeping a functioning economy going
https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1315569492865495041?s=20
Brexit is a poisoned chalice for Labour. I think Starmer is waiting on either a no deal outcome or a partial deal that is almost as bad, because he wants Johnson and the Tories to take ownership of what happens next. It’s their mess. Any policy from Labour right now which is seen as giving anything to the EU will be jumped upon by the Tories and their right wing friends in the press. I’m not suggesting that this is the right approach, but Labour does fear that any policy from them which is seen as giving in to the EU could result in the Tories being let off the hook. The Tories have specialised for years in shifting the blame elsewhere. They are very good at it.
A year or two of Brexit no deal reality and Labour might then get away with advocating something along the lines of a comprehensive Norway type deal. It might look particularly appealing once the EU puts the Tory UK Government to the back of the queue for any future deals (or talks on anything given that they don’t trust international law breakers), while suggesting that an alternative UK Government might go to the front of the queue.
Re the polls, the Tories still have that hardcore of brexit support from little England, Starmer probably hopes that it will fall away once reality hits, or be eaten up by Farage’s next gravy train party when he hits the election trail again with shouts of betrayal (Farage will do this because he lives in a fantasy world that expects an EU surrender).
MarP – you make a valid point.
Farage may live in a fantasy world but he only makes an impact when ‘donors’ stump up the money. When we see his connections with Steve Bannon (now indicted for fraud) who is trying to orchestrate Right wing groups across Europe, we can guess what they stand for.
I think many are over -looking that if the end of the Transition period is half as bad as we suspect, Starmer won’t have to bother about an apologetic suggestion to ask for a Norway solution. There will be a massive public demand to rejoin. He can lead that and draw off many the rump Lib Dem votes.
The problem for the Labour Party is if it wants power than it has to mimic the Tories and appeal to a broad base. If it wants to be socialist and stick to an agenda then it would have to accept that it would be unlikely that the party would gain enough votes to form a government. Even in the last election the left vote was split sufficiently to ensure a big Tory success with small gains in marginal seats. The problem is the First Past the Post system. A PR vote would allow parties to stand on principle and gain votes and influence proportionately and to form coalitions to form Government. Admittedly this would allow rightist parties to stand on more radical agendas also. As long as the Tory Party was still the largest which has a fairly high probability it would be them who would attempt to form the coalition. Whilst FPP still exists it forces parties to dilute their message in pursuit of mass votes. It is all very well to criticise Labour for not being radical enough but the problem will always be convincing the voter to vote for a radical agenda. Voters have traditionally been small c conservative.
I don’t think it’s a surprise he wouldn’t be drawn on a Brexit question.
It would have been better to ask about the blatant corruption of this government in issuing multi million pound contracts to companies who have ties to their party.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but he hasn’t challenged Johnson once on this in PMQs.
Why the hell not?
I wish I knew
But note my comments elsewhere on this
Whilst I can understand Starmer stalling on Brexit- it might be that the very fact of labour demanding an extension to the transition period would jeopardise the potential of Johnson asking for this.
What I cannot forgive Starmer for is not standing up for any principles in the abstention he has demanded from his MPs on 2 bills- one the time limitation on bringing accusations against members of the armed forces of torture/ murder/ rape and the second allowing undercover officers to facilitate murder / violence/ have fake sexual relations and even father children and abandon them.
You had Kier Starmer on LBC and the best question you could think to ask was Brexit related?
Fair enough if he could do something about it but you know he can’t.
The current government aren’t going to stop for anyone or anything.
With the best will in the world Richard, that was utterly pointless.
Why didn’t you ask him, “Does the UK Government borrow money?” and then destroy him live on air.
Why didn’t you ask him if he thinks governments finances & household finances are the same?
“Is it really appropriate that the man leading the UK government opposition has NO idea how that government funds itself?”
That’d have put the cat amongst the pigeons.
You do great work, ceaselessly and we’re all grateful but next time… go for the throat.
Let me just suggest there were constraints on what I could ask…..
Your question was a perfect choice. It didn’t ask him to re-do the battle; we all know he is trying to make a wimpish ‘virtue’ of not being pro-EU./ It asked him to be pragmatically sane. Even then – he failed.
I’m afraid a very small surprise. His stance – even where as a former DPP, one would assumne he would have principles, e.g. on not excusing British forces from prosecution for Human Rights abuses, and on not permitting immunity from criminal prosecution for CHIS – has been feeble to down-right craven. He shows no sign whatsoever of realising that, unless the new, authoritarian, Breximaniac, xenophobic, austeritarian Tory agenda is contested, it will inevitably make no room for any alternative view to be promulagted with any chance of becoming effective with the elctorate. He is conducting surrender. Forensic or not, it will never amount to more than a plea for mitigation.