I think you have to admit that Keir Starmer had quite a weekend.
His article in The Observer made it absolutely clear that he really is determined to pursue Thatcherism when in office.
His appearance with Laura Kuenssberg only reinforced that impression.
He also let slip that he is so dedicated to Conservative policy that he will not change the two-child benefits policy, much to the annoyance of even his own loyalists who appeared to have no prior notice of this.
The necessary conclusions from this are at least threefold.
First, the time to pretend that Starmer is doing one thing but means to do another is over. We are seeing what we are going to get.
Second, Starmer lied to become Labour leader and has lied ever since. He is, regretfully, about as trustworthy as Boris Johnson as a result. In fact, he may be worse. I am almost inclined to think Johnson was sufficiently detached from reality to not know how often he lied. Starmer is lying quite deliberately.
Third, we face the prospect of a truly torrid Labour government that fails to meet any reasonable expectation of anyone who thinks themselves even vaguely left of centre, which most in the UK are when to fines to social issues.
This, then, is a disaster in the making that is all too easy to foretell, and which could lead to a Tory return to power all too soon.
Opinion polls suggest that this is an outcome no-one wants. People are bored by Conservative policy, austerity and the claim that a government imposing record tax levels is unable to act. Instinctively (based on experience in 2009 and 2020) people know that government is not constrained in the way Labour now claims. They smell a rat, even before most have had the chance to vote for it.
So, what is there to do? Very obviously those who realise that things are those bad now need to vote for anyone but the Tories and Labour. Who that other party to support might be will only be apparent locally.
Then the programme of opposition to a government that is pre-ordained by its own choice to fail us all needs to be thought about. There are many options available here. Which one to opt for and focus on is personal choice, but what we know is that Starmer is going to fail on:
- Climate change
- Renewables
- Transport reform
- The economy
- Public sector pay
- The NHS
- Social care
- Education
- Law and order
- Housing
- Trade unions
- Reversing Tory policy
- Support for local government
- Electoral reform
- Europe
- Interest rates
- Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
- Defence
- Inequality
- Taxing the rich
Take your pick. Become a bit of a geek about it. Wade in. The aim should be to make Starmer, and most especially his MPs, as uncomfortable as possible for as long as possible in such issues until, eventually, the pressure on him to reform becomes insurmountable and he has to change.
How to do this?
- Inform yourself
- Join groups
- Talk to people
- Write to MPs, councillors and anyone else
- Phone in to the radio (you are likely to get on)
- Consider peaceful protest
- Join a union if it is appropriate for you
- Write a blog
- Comment here
- Tweet, Thread, use Mastodon, create a YouTube, TikTok or Instagram post.
But just don't suffer in silence. Starmer has to know he is failing, already. Only then might he change, or be forced to. Things are far too serious to accept the dire policy options as those Starmer is now proposing. We all have to demand better.
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:
If not Starmer, then who though?
There are a huge number of inept and incapable politicians running (or hoping to run) our lives at the moment and I can’t see anyone in there that gives me hope.
I’ll stand in the voting booth when the time comes…but it might just be a drawing of a huge C & B on the slip. Juvenile I know, but then what do they expect when presented with such an appalling choice?
If you do want to spoil your ballot, so at least it gets counted, a suggestion I saw was to write out on some sticky paper the reasons why all the candidates are dire, and then stick that onto your ballot paper. I believe the candidates can view all spoilt ballots, so it just might make them think. The sticky paper idea is so that you don’t have to write an essay on the ballot paper in the booth!
I have long felt that there should be a “none of the above” option on the ballot paper. I think it sends a powerful message. Politicians would hate it, so, it will probably never happen. It should be remembered that around a third of voters do not vote at all, which is as many as actually vote for whoever wins, usually Tory, under FPTP. Such a failed system that will keep on failing.
It only really works with compulsory voting when it makes a lot of sense
My sentiments exactly Richard. Well put.
The prime directive of any Conservative government is :’Defend privilege at all costs!’ A Labour opposition should have precisely the opposite priority: Promote equality, social and economic justice as a clear principled position. Starmer has aligned himself and his party with the established status quo. There is no evidence to support any other view. A Starmer government calling itself ‘Labour’, or even ‘socialist’, could do severe damage to progressive political forces.
I abhor all the positions Starmer has adopted, as detailed above, But the last straw for me is the retaining of the two child limit for benefit which has been rightly condemned as a factor in increasing child poverty. I would like to see how Polly Toynbee squares this pernicious attack on child welfare with her continuing support for Starmer. It’s going to take a bloody big clothes peg this time, Polly. I’ve cancelled my LP membership. Given the current direction of the party, they’ll be glad to be rid of me but not as glad as I am to be rid of them.
Mine was cancelled after the Sunak attack ads. Yet the labour convener at the door (she didn’t know I’ve left so got no help) said that her candidate was in favour of PR. I think there’s something bad going on at the top…
The ‘something bad at the top’ is an Establishment coup, designed to make sure Labour won’t change anything much after the near-miss with Corbyn.
Hundreds of thousands of us instinctively distrusted Starmer; now the evidence is out there. “His” Labour Party offers absolutely nothing to traditional Labour voters; or people who feel strongly about social justice, or people who have nothing. Where is HOPE? Nowhere.
We’ve identified the problem. What is the actual solution? What action do we take? Right now? Or do we simply continue to intellectualise this? Fiddling while Rome burns?
Perhaps we could take him to court for falsely using the name “Labour”.
I fear the last would fail
The Newham council election result provides a glimmer of hope that the Starmfuhrer has a few unsettling surprises in store. We can live in hope that enough people in enough constituencies act similarly come next year.
Starmfuehrer, Kevin. Not a misleading play on words, unfortunately, especially after his latest statements. Which I have to say shocked me. I didn’t think he’d go that far. Richard is right. He is hopeless if not hapless. This is going to be an awful election. I know a large number of people who have told me that they are thinking of not voting for Labour in the next election. I didn’t ask them, but I got the distinct impression they might vote green. I may be wrong about this.
One third of the electorate did not vote at the last general election. If it is more than 50% is the vote invalid?
Ben, No. There is no quorum for a general election. 1 vote in each constituency would, technically produce an MP in each constituency.
Should there be a minimum turnout? Probably yes, but what do you do if there aren’t enough people prepared to vote?
A really important article Richard and a call to arms.
If you were to make a video explaining just why Starmer is wrong with his policies, especially the economics we could all share the hell out of it.
If Starmer can’t be replaced then we can damn well try to change his direction before it’s too late.
Worth a try
I share your frustration at Labour’s unwillingness to separate themselves from Tory policy… but there is a reason.
Capping benefits maybe a poor policy…. but it is popular. Stephen Bush (FT) quotes an opinion poll that says the cap should be kept by 60 to 22 (18 don’t knows). There is even a majority in favour of this policy among supporters/voters of each of three main UK parties (47 – 35 for Labour supporters, 56-27 for LDs).
If Starmer scraps the cap it would be absolute gold for the media and the Tories. Labour needs to avoid engaging in “culture wars” and focus on the issues highlighted in your excellent piece about the symbiotic nature of Public and Private sectors. It is on this “battleground” where Labour should be engaging… but is not…. which is disappointing.
Stephen Bush also points out that this maintaining the cap will not survive in government – it is unpopular with MPs and party members alike so once in government it will disappear under a “pro-growth” revamp of benefits.
I have to say I disagree – he shoud be brave enough to stand uo to bigots.
Brave…. or “brave” in the context of Yes! Minister (ie. political suicide).
Is this 1992 or 1997? We won’t know until 2024.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t fix the problem. This is a democracy, and if the ‘majority’ is emotionally deeply committed to policies that are destructive of their prosperity and well-being, and are not susceptible to reason and sound argument; there is really very little you can do about it. Labour has given up; it is pursuing mollifying but ineffective policies simply to be elected. They will figure out what to do after winning; but it will be PR waffle, and no substance. We are going nowhere.
The only answer is the end of FPTP, for an STV-style PR system that hands the electoral system over to the voters. I used ‘majority’ in inverted commas because we have an FPTP majority system that concentrates power in Party, and in consequence effectively disenfranchises large numbers of people who live in constituencies in which they have no hope of overturning many MPs, which is becoming worse with boundary changes. The other key to the failure of FPTP is the high number of those who do not vote. Around 30%+ (moving toward 40% over time, and 50% in some constituencies, who do not vote at all; some have given up, but Party vested interest will never change it, because the current arrangements are easier to control and manage for Party advantage. Party is a cartel operated by an ideology). The rsult is you ony need about 34% of voters, and 24% of the potential electorate ,to have an 80 seat majoritty, and dominant, unyielding politcal power.
Change? It will not happen. This is Britain.
Are you seriously suggesting that we should only have policies that are apparently popular? Capital punishment and the birch, for example? Workhouses for the destitute? Povert pay for those without an education? Oh, sorry, we already have the last one.
If you gebuyinely believe 5that, why not just re-elect the Tories?
No…. but do you seriously believe that a Labour government will be as bad as a Tory one?
In a sensible world with PR all this election game theory would be consigned to the bin….. but until then we will have a two party system where Labour is forced by the media to tack right before any General election. Imagine the headlines if he had said “yes, we will scrap the benefit cap”….. we could all pat ourselves on the back for “honesty” as we settle in for another 5 years of Tory (mis)rule.
Besides, on this particular policy I think everyone knows it will change…. once elected.
The thing is everyoine thought that was Labour policy and they were on 50% so I don’t think that is the case
”do you seriously believe that a Labour government will be as bad as a Tory one?”
It’d be nice to think at minimum they could be no worse, so any little improvement on the current shower would be a bonus. Yet the needs of our time demand much more than treading water and tinkering around the edges. Is there really any evidence that we’ll get much more than this? Starmer told Milliband recently he doesn’t believe in hope or change. He said he hates tree-huggers, which I guess indicates his negative attitude to doing anything significant about the climate emergency.
In a way Labour right now is even worse than the Tories. With the Tories you KNOW there is no hope for the average person or for the environment. With the prospective change of government one should be entitled to hope for progressive change, but it seems Labour are doing their level best to dash all hopes and avoid committing to any such change. It is all VERY disappointing!
Clive Parry
YESSSSS of course I believe that “No…. but do you seriously believe that a Labour government will be as bad as a Tory one?” Give me 1 single reason to belive otherwise that isn’t based on blind faith and stupidity?
I was a full time trade union official in 1997 and I remember the euphoria we all felt when the Labour government was elected because, finally, we had a government that believed in supporting working people. How bloody stupid were we then? Not a single piece of anti- union legislation was repealed. No support was given to the workers. We had spent the entire period of the Tory government prior to then saying – ‘never mind, it will be OK when Labour gets back in’ We wasted years when we should have been developing strategies to fight the anti-worker ethos, and we were betrayed. Fool me once, shame on you – fool me twice, shame on me.
At least this time Starmer is honest in declaring that he intends to betray us yet again.
1 single piece of evidence why I should support the other Tory party led by Starmer? Just 1?
If true then we are still relying on the thought that he is purely lying for power. That he is betraying his moral instincts only for electoral gain. Somehow we are to trust that when he is in power that his intentions are for good and not for evil. Somehow we are to believe that the labour political party that he lied to, or labour MPs that enabled the lying, will be able to hold him accountable.
Or just join, campaign for, and vote for the Green Party, the only major party addressing climate and social justice in any meaningful way.
The next in the Green Party Talks series (via Zoom webinar) is titled
“Practical policies for a fairer economy: can a green economy be a more equal one?”
What are the obstacles we face on that path?
And what are the policies that will help us get there?
With a panel including Molly Scott Cato.
Jul 25, 2023 06:00 PM via Zoom
https://livingroom.greenparty.org.uk/greentalks/
Sounds like a good forum to inform/discuss Green Party economic policy?
Full Description of event below:
Inequality defines our capitalist economy. A decade of austerity, stagnant wages, and rocketing prices have pushed millions into a situation of poverty and precarity.
Yet, some have never had it so good: fossil fuel and luxury goods companies are posting record profits, while the wealth of billionaires in the UK has tripled since 2010. In short, the super-rich are getting ever richer – and doing so at the expense of wider society and the health of the planet. As Greens, we know that environmental justice and economic justice must go hand in hand. A greener future must be a fairer future.
But what are the obstacles we face on that path? And what are the policies that will help us get there?
Join us to hear our expert panel discuss their visions for a greener and fairer economy.
https://livingroom.greenparty.org.uk/greentalks/
But are questions allowed?
I’ve been told there will be space for Q&As after each talk.
Well said Richard. I was so despondent a while ago I thought I might not vote at all. Then I listened to Clive Lewis on proportional representation. I also noticed that Labour members voted for PR in the last Labour conference. I’ve decided to vote tactically. Basically, vote Labour to keep a Tory out, otherwise vote for a party that supports proportional representation.
In response to davidn’s point above, my immediate thought was “Clive Lewis!” Or why not let Ed Miliband have another go? The point is that there are competent people available, but we don’t get to hear from them much because the current ideology in the Labour front bench and executive ensures they are restricted in their opportunities to speak out.
My other point would be that we have to do everything we can to ensure everyone turns up to vote – and makes clear their dissatisfaction with the choices on offer (unless you do have the chance to vote for Clive, or Ed, obviously!) by writing “None of the Above” (NOTA) on your ballot paper. This is an unambiguous rejection of the options available and will be reported in the final tallies. It will be impossible to spin such a mass rejection, unlike alternatives such as the childish c&b, or writing insults on the ballot paper. It’s essential to make such a positive declaration, if you have no acceptable candidate, to avoid claims that “voter apathy” has affected the result.
I might well give Ed Miliband anther go
If you’re offering a lifeline Richard, I’ll take it – thanks.
I have another suggestion to add to your list. Since the BOE and the Govt seem to want a recession, give them one.
Work out how much your pay has declined by through inflation, and work only to what you have been paid for. So if your pay has in real terms declined by 25% since 2010, go slow, work at 75% of your capacity.
Spend less if you can – on the things they need you to buy – amazon, ebay, fossil fuel energy, streaming, gambling, social media, fast exploitative fashion, ultra-processed food, newspapers.
Not as a miserable ‘we have to do without’, but as a positive ‘there are better things to spend my money on’ – small, ‘local’ businesses who still care about providing value and service. They still exist, and many are on the internet.
Online does not have to mean megastore: https://gibbsandpartners.com/blog/2020/12/christmas-shopping/
I suspect I am already doing that…
And this morning, we’ve got Yvette Cooper defending the decision to retain the two child benefit cap after a report came out noting the case for abolishing it was overwhelming.
Of course she’s another Oxford PPE/LSE graduate (with a side helping of Harvard), so it’s no surprise she’s neoliberal down from the top of her head to her toes.
There’s a forum infrequent which has an ongoing thread entitled, ‘Tory Vermin’. It’s not going to be long before we need a new thread with just the party name changed.
What have we done to deserve such awful, power-hungry but entirely idea-free people in both government and opposition?
If the remaining LibDems have half a brain, they’ll pivot leftwards to fill the vacancy left by Starmer’s Labour Party and work out an electoral pact with the Greens to maximise their influence. I’m not convinced they do.
If I may – & with reference to your vermin comment, what follows falls firmly into “your could not make this up” – an extract from Wikipedia – note the sentence on Thatcher – “chief rat”!!
The Vermin Club was an organisation of grassroots Conservative Party supporters in Britain in the late 1940s.
July 1948, Aneurin Bevan,taddressed the annual Labour rally for the North of England at Belle Vue, Manchester, and described Conservatives as “lower than vermin”.Young Tories took on the description with ironic self-deprecation and set up the Vermin Club.
Members took to wearing vermin badges (a chrome badge featuring a rat and the word VERMIN). A whole hierarchy was established, so that those who recruited ten new party members wore badges identifying them as vile vermin; those who recruited twenty five were very vile vermin. Margaret Thatcher was an early member of the group and rose through the ranks to become a “Chief Rat”.The club boasted a membership of between 105,000 and 120,000 at its height
No words for this sort of people, but the only thing that really surprises me is that there were such large numbers of them back then.
I was sitting in the car waiting for my wife and put on the radio. I listened to Lewis Goodall on LBC. The subject was just the one you have written about here. The first two callers were men who were usually Labour voters but don’t want to vote for Starmer. The next felt that Labour MPs would be concerned with things like equality whereas the Conservatives are not (quite the reverse in my opinion).
This is issue is not confined to a small group of people. I heard, at the weekend, some of my family who voted Labour last time saying they don’t know who to vote for now.
Lewis Goodall is quite vocal on this, and rightly so
I do think that Labour are genuinely worried about another 1992 moment and to be fair very few people understand the true nature of money or economics so even if Labour did they wouldn’t believe they could convince the electorate. Having said that I agree with your analysis.
I didn’t vote for starmer. I keep wondering why I remain a Labour member but at least I will get a vote if there is a leadership election.
I think we need Labour to win because otherwise the tories are likely to implement all sorts of right wing nonsense such increased privatisation and austerity. We could even get truss back or braverman.
Everything they have said on the matter indicates that the privatisation of the NHS will continue apace under Starmer/Streeting. They are not going to save the NHS but give away even more of it. The NHS will not be safe with the current Labour party.
Meeting starting at 7 pm about how we can save our NHS organised by the SCG with Labour against Austerity and Momentum.
Gordon Brown has an interesting piece in the Guardian;
The penultimate paragraph is interesting considering his approach when in power.
‘What, as Orbán has admitted, gives permission to the right to fight culture wars is that neoliberal versions of globalisation have failed, denying working people security in a volatile world. Multiple crises, from falling living standards to worsening pollution, must convince us that no return to the normality of a failed status quo is possible.’
This paragraph below has persuaded me that this might not be the best time for me to give up.
‘As long as centrists and progressive parties complacently write off today’s dissatisfaction with globalisation as a transient blip, these culture warriors will capture the popular desire for change and reverse every inch of recent progress in human rights and international cooperation, not least the European-wide green agenda already under assault from the right in Germany, the Netherlands and the European parliament.’
I’m a member of the Labour party, have been for many years, the last few have been difficult with what I expect from the party and what they are prepared to deliver diverging more and more. In the last 12 months I have written to 4 members of the shadow cabinet with policy enquirees. I kept the contacts free from ranting or accusations. I have not received a single reply. My contact to John Healey was the most straightforward, simply asking if Labour planned to increase defence spending given the current global situation and our committment to supply Ukraine. Not even the usual about needing to access the situation, view the books etc.
A party so sure of it’s success that it feels it can ignore its members?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/14/spain-election-europe-neo-fascism-vox-germany-finland
Undoubtedly, yes
Members are always a hindrance in the Labour Party
It may not be popular to say so but it is a pertinent fact that as Starmer has ditched the modern version of traditional Labour policies on which he was elected Labour’s polling has gone consistently upward.
It is likely that this has been driven mostly by dissatisfaction with the appalling Tory governments of the last 13 years but nevertheless it is an achievement that should not lightly be dismissed.
The likely state of this country in five years time if the Tories were to win is depressing beyond words and would be the grossest disgrace ever committed by one generation against its successors.
Like many people on this blog I think that Starmer’s most important task is the major overhaul of our current Parliamentary voting system, the key change that makes all the others possible, but even if that isn’t done I would still think it worth voting Labour in order to protect this country and the people in it from a greedy, arrogant elite who will never change even when the tumbril is at their door.
Come on….
Govermments always have to fail for Oppositions to win. The Tories are so bad Labour has risen. No one has gone their way because they believe in what Starmer says because he says nothing.
“So, what is there to do?”
There is your problem. The ideology is buried deep in the politics. We have a ritual dance every four years, to dress up the same old failed solutions in a way that looks as if the problems will be fixed, without changing anything at all. We go round in endless circles, that we discover in hindsight (adding the dimension of time), is a downward spiral to the ruination of most peoples lives.
I hear nothing that convinces me there is any real appetite for change.The sense of inertia and decay in Britain is quite overwhelming. Old, bankrupt ideas prevail. Britain is a politically managed and gerrymandered gerontocracy; the generation that created this mess never retires, never acknowledges their utter failure and blocks everything. They insist on going on forever, until there will be nothing left to destroy. I find it increasingly difficult not to believe Britain is frankly a lost cause.
The sheer hubristic ignorance of Starmer and Reeves – so proud to show they have little idea where money spent on public services comes from or what its wider effects are. Trumpeting the ‘growth first’ mantra which has led to the destructive position we are now in .
If people do want to message Labour – maybe targeting those who will attend next weekend’s policy forum would be a start – they are listed on here:
https://www.policyforum.labour.org.uk/about/npf?filter%5Bregion%5D=&filter%5Btype%5D%5B0%5D=only_tu&filter%5Btu_organisation%5D=9&filter%5Bepo%5D=0&filter%5Bnec%5D=0&filter%5Bpcm%5D=
The Labour List website notes various proposals up for discussion:
https://labourlist.org/2023/07/labour-manifest-national-policy-forum-what-policies-stand/
Thanks
Starmer’s blind spot – and Labour’s – is now inequality.
He has talked of ramping up the economy as if that addresses inequality on its own but seems light on the fact that it is the economy itself – the way the labour and investment side works – that is producing inequality.
Therefore, Labour is in my opinion being relaxed about something else – Fascism – something that Blue Labour in particular like to play with.
Someone needs to tell Stymied just how simple it is – you reduce inequality and you’ll kill fascism and populism.
But Stymied’s Labour hopes to accommodate fascism by all accounts – which is a huge mistake. As a result nothing will change. Various interest groups – racial, religious, gender, class – will all instead be encouraged to keep fighting each other over meagre resources, with the odd celebrity melt down to keep our minds off our terminal direction of travel.
‘Caretaker/interim government’ anyone?
Sad.
Starmer told such an obvious lie on Kuenssberg about tree-huggers.
It was said he said he hated them in front of the whole shadow cabinet. So who broke ranks and leaked it to the press? Which lie does he expect us to believe there. Is the whole shadow cabinet going to back him up in the lie that he never said it? In which case not a single shadow cabinet member should be able to take over from him.
Going against the two child policy is such an obvious u-turn, which will affect over a million children. That’s two million votes he has lost there.
Tonight there is an SCG webinar on how we save our NHS. Two members definitely involved are Richard Burgon, the MP who is organising it along with Labour Against Austerity and Momentum, and Kate Osborne, who is speaking at it.
There are at least 30 members of the SCG who could be banned from the party by Starmer, although only Webbe and Corbyn have been so far.
There are quite a few members of that group who could easily take over from Starmer, including Corbyn.
“There are quite a few members of that group who could easily take over from Starmer, including Corbyn.”
This belief is unrealistic. Any MP wishing to get on the candidate list for party leader must secure the backing of a minimum of 20% of sitting Labour MPs. At the moment there are 195 Labour MPs, so to become a candidate an MP would require 39 of their colleagues to support them. The SCG has 32 MPs in the Labour Party.
To top that off, say a candidate fro the SCG defies the odds; they not only get on the list but win the election. Those same treacherous MPs that did all they could to ruin Corbyn would waste no time doing exactly the same to this new left wing party leader.
Nobody is going to challenge him now, though. It will be after the next general election when he has lost lots of seats to independent socialists. Also, you don’t have to be a member of the SCG to vote for a member of the SCG.
Jenw:
I neither stated or implied that only members of the SCG can vote for other members of the SCG. However, the members of the SCG are in all likelihood the only Labour MPs that would nominate a member of this group to get on to the ballot paper. As I mentioned before they number just 32 and would need another 7 MPs to back their candidate simply to get on to the list of candidates which will not happen. Factionalism has eaten the heart of the Labour Party.
“Nobody is going to challenge him now, though. It will be after the next general election when he has lost lots of seats to independent socialists.”
Unfortunately I’m inclined to disgaree with you about this prediction too. We’re still locked in to a two party system thanks to our pitiful electoral system of first past the post. Swing voters will again be the prime targets of the two main parties, and as many that are likely to support the Labour Party in the next GE were Tory voters in 2019 a poor performance by the Labour Party in government will predictably send swathes of these voters back into the camp of the Conservatives as they have done so for decades. I would be overjoyed to be completely and utterly wrong in this view.
I wish you would stand for Parliament Richard…even form your own party, look at the impact Farage had on politics.
Farage never got elected
I am more use doing this
But you have no influence in the places that matter!! Farage created a monster very quickly and so could you..
I don’t share your view…
For all his weaknesses, I think Corbyn’s tenure showed that, without the backing of the media and/or one of the main parties, you have no chance of getting anywhere in politics in this country.
Corbyn was extremely popular amongst certain groups of voters, his policies (even if they were laid out in a somewhat haphazard manner) were extremely popular among other groups, but he was repeatedly knifed in the back by the New Labourites who moved heaven and earth to try to get rid of him and he was ludicrously demonised by the dominant right-wing media.
If it hadn’t been for the Brexit effect, the last election would undoubtedly have been closer, but the New Labourites have successfully scapegoated Corbyn as the reason for the defeat, washing their hands of their own failings. Through some judicious lying, they’ve got their man into pole position for power and the only question we have now is just how bad is he going to be assuming he does become PM.
The more I think about it, the more furious I feel – and I’ve never even been a member of a political party!
Firstly I must say thank you for all you are doing. Hubby and I have been following your work for some years. Your voice gives hope to change the narrow minded Thatcherism of neoliberalism capitalism free market. The very thought of Starmeright is terrifying, you can almost smell the policies from Mandleson’s advice with his disdain for the poor. After all he famously said ‘he’s intensely relaxed with the filthy rich’. The Labour Party has abandoned the working people and the ones suffering from the worst financial squeeze many of us have every seen. This at a time we urgently for the welfare of most of the people and the country more balance. As we know where there is a top there is a bottom and the bottom is crushed.
Politically in the worst of times of no progressive choice to improve rather than ‘reform’ our economy and planet. You would be forgiven to think that this set up was almost ‘planned’.
A factor in all of this, is why do the unions continue to fund Labour?
Would it be significant if they supported another party instead, and would that make a difference to votes?
I think that is coming to an end
Perhaps the 2015 General Election gave the Unions food for thought when the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) fielded a very substantial 135 parliamentary candidates and every last one of them lost their deposits. In addition they also put forward 619 candidates in the local authority elections where the TUSC gained no seats (and, in one ward, no votes) and lost three anti-cuts councillors in Leicester and Hull. They retain one affiliated councillor each in Warrington, Walsall and Hull, and two in Southampton.
Thanks Richard, the aim of his recent speeches and articles seems to be to crush any hope the left has in a progressive position from Labour come the next election. It’s deeply disappointing. If it weren’t for the Observer article, I might think these overtures were aimed at Tory voters nervous to vote Labour. Instead he seems keen to banish anyone left of centre from the discourse, and remake Labour as a centre right, conservative (with a small c) party.
It won’t wash, because if one thing Brexit and rising right wing populism ought to have taught us, it’s that people want change, and politicians who are willing to deliver that.
All a Thatcherite 80s revival Labour Party will achieve is pushing long term Labour voters away, splitting their vote, and putting themselves out of power for longer. In fact, with this pathetic policy pool, I don’t even think they could win a majority at the next election.
They might get some swing in the tory shires from it, but do they honestly believe they can win enough seats in Scotland with this sort of approach, or keep all their urban seats if they continue to ignore the concerns of working families?
My most charitable interpretation is that this attitude is all about the by-elections next week, and they are trying to give Sunak enough of a kicking to reduce his power even further, and trigger a GE. But like you say, he has not been honest from the start, so this does appear to be the real starmer.
I am dismayed and despondent. I can’t believe it has come to this.
Richard, I respect you enormously but I am devastated because the first assignment, the most important assignment is to GTTFO!! They will nullify the populace and the country undoubtedly if we do not.
I am absolutely desperate because if we do begin this effort now, we risk diluting and jeopardising a certain Tory annihilation. We will play into their hands. I know Starmer is dissembling and awful and a Tory in his arrogant, tiny, non-socialist heart and may only be slightly better than clown Johnson and jolly japes Sunak but the Labour Party behind him, I still have a modicum of faith in.
I doubt that Starmer will smell this coffee and fix up because of all the devices you recommend and they are all good ideas but Starmer is a Tory in the most fundamental way: he fully believes in himself, his nonsense and his tightness. He is unequivocal in dropping his pledges, breaks hos promises with full assurance in hos own piety. Believes his own hype and does not, cannot listen. The chances therefore or forcing change on him through demonstrating what we think of his policies are less they slim. You have to imagine oriole in the party have tried.
I think there might be a chance, if the labour constitution allowed, and there was a better candidate to campaign for and get behind to do so. Otherwise, I fear we are on a hiding to nothing and will end up with more Tory years.
It’s a very real risk that we would be running and with someone of your influence behind it, there is a real risk of derailing things but perhaps not in the way that we would hope. Maybe I am become defeatist in my despair but even if we end up with a Starmer Labour government, I cannot see how that is not ultimately better than another 4 years of. Tory government, when the last 13 had literally got the country on its very knees.
We must think about this very carefully and plan for every contingency. The outcome of this CANNOT be another Tory government. We need to be able to all but guarantee that.
If this opposition you advocate increases the chances of another Tory government getting in when we have so very nearly got them out, I am very much afraid that we may need to reconsider this.
What a terrible place to be.
The Tories will get themselves out – parties in power always lose elections, oppositions never win them
So I will focus on what is to come
And it is more from the Tories…
What does GTTFO mean? I could understand GTFTO , referring to getting rid of the Tories, but I don’t have a clue what you mean.
I agree, I’d rather the Green Party in power. I know you criticised their economic policies last week, but I feel they would create a much fairer society. Sadly I know it’s not going to happen.
I am dismayed and despondent. I can’t believe it has come to this.
Richard, I respect you enormously but I am devastated because the first assignment, the most important assignment is to GTTFO!! They will nullify the populace and the country undoubtedly if we do not.
I am absolutely desperate because if we do begin this effort now, we risk diluting and jeopardising a certain Tory annihilation. We will play into their hands. I know Starmer is dissembling and awful and a Tory in his arrogant, tiny, non-socialist heart and may only be slightly better than clown Johnson and jolly japes Sunak but the Labour Party behind him, I still have a modicum of faith in.
I doubt that Starmer will smell this coffee and fix up because of all the devices you recommend and they are all good ideas but Starmer is a Tory in the most fundamental way: he fully believes in himself, his nonsense and his own rightness. He is unequivocal in dropping his pledges, breaks his promises with full assurance in his own piety. Believes his own hype and does not, cannot listen. The chances therefore or forcing change on him through demonstrating what we think of his policies are less than slim. You have to imagine people in the party have tried.
I think there might be a chance, if the Labour constitution allowed, and there was a better candidate to campaign for and get behind, to do so. Otherwise, I fear we are on a hiding to nothing and will end up with more Tory years.
It’s a very real risk that we would be running and with someone of your influence behind it, there is a real risk of derailing things but perhaps not in the way that we would hope. Maybe I am become defeatist in my despair but even if we end up with a Starmer Labour government, I cannot see how that is not ultimately better than another 4 years of. Tory government, when the last 13 had literally got the country on its very knees.
We must think about this very carefully and plan for every contingency. The outcome of this CANNOT be another Tory government. We need to be able to all but guarantee that.
If this opposition you advocate increases the chances of another Tory government getting in when we have so very nearly got them out, I am very much afraid that we may need to reconsider this.
What a terrible place to be.
Lets not beat about the bush, the thought behind the two-child benefits policy is that theses surplus children should not have been born and should not survive.
It is
And that is vile
And utterly prejudicial to the child in question
Mr Ben, in fairness to the Liebore-tory party (given there is no policy differences why not regard them as the same party?) only the right people should have children. Naturally one wants to ensure that the poor (& by extension the indigenous and idle – why else would they be poor?) can’t reproduce too much – otherwise where would we be? Thus the threat of reducing families to penury is surely only part of natural selection? Perhaps it can be regarded as a variation on the 1930s German government decision to get rid of those that were (mentally) incapacitated in some way or other. After all, it is tax payers money & as the nice Mr Starmer regularly notes – there ain’t much of that around.
Time to go, I have some boots to polish, a uniform to clean and a torch lit march to take part in.
(upload your irony subroutine before reading btw).
“First, the time to pretend that Starmer is doing one thing but means to do another is over.”
Absolutely, 100% this. The problem is that even over the weekend just gone I encountered dozens of people babbling this drivel, to the point of getting themselves into some pretty heated arguments and rather making fools of themselves in the process. I honestly do not know if this stems from plain old uncritical party tribalism or a fearful reaction manifested as an outright refusal to deal with reality because the likely incoming Labour government means that our near future will remain miserably bleak and without any genuine hope of improvement or of a visible alternative.
Its not just Starmer who is the problem: the vast majority of the PLP wanted him (or someone like him) running the show. Exactly how the electorate will react to a Labour government that continues to administer using the Tory’s current agenda could very likely spell real trouble before the end of the decade. Reflecting on this has made me more determined to encourage people to vote for the Greens (economic warts and all) more than anything for their intention to bring about PR. Electoral reform (even the rather shoddy STV) would allow for new political entities to be viable and provide some alternative (and hope) to the current real lack of political plurality. Fingers crossed for a hung parliament as this seems to be the best we can realistically achieve under the circumstances.
We should maybe invite Bernie Sanders to have a go.
@ Chris W
Hung Parliament? Yes please. I can honestly say I not only don’t want SKS’s VILE Faux-Labour Party to win a GE, but I want them humiliated by failing to win as many votes (10.3m) or seats (202) as Labour did in 2019.
Preferably, I’d hope they’d win fewer seats than a Left Wing Socialist offshoot Party – the recent Newham result may, I hope, be more than a straw in the wind, but will hopefully be widely replicated.
SKS is unutterably vile! He & his RW fanatics – the close circle Starmerites, and the swivel-eyed cult-followers, the Starmerrhoids (a moniker I invented – though others probably came up with it independently – as describing “a pain in the arse & potentially dangerous to health”) are a “clear and present danger” to democracy, decency and the rule of law.
ALL progressives & progressive forces must do all they can to prevent this vile tinpot would-be dictator and his vile Faux-Labour, Party, from getting ANYWHERE near power. He/they would be a disaster!
Only Labour’s death – that of Starmer’s VILE Faux-Labour – can allow Labour’s resurrection.
If Starmer’s VILE Faux-Labour wins, Labour will die the death of Pasokification, and will deserve it.
PS: Richard, in another answer you said McDonnel was into the Fiscal Rules nonsense, and that Jeremy C didn’t know how to govern.
To which I respond that the 2017 and 2019 Labour Manifestos were costed, making the need to deploy idiotic Fiscal Rules less likely.
To the second, I offer two responses. First, where is your evidence Corbyn didn’t know how to govern, given that he has time and again called things right, where Starmer has an unblemished record of failure? As Peter Oborne has noted, one reason for hatred of Corbyn was just that fact, that he had called most issues correctly.
Second, could he have been any worse than Sunak, Truss and Cameron? (Only May struck me as knowing how to govern).
Also, the 2017 and 2019 Labour Manifestos not only gave people hope, by giving them vision, but much more importantly, they actually did two things: they offered the electorate things the electorate have shown they want, such as nationalisation of energy, transport, water and the renationalisation of the NHS, and secondly, they addressed the REAL needs of the UK (eg free broadband would be immensely supportive of societal improvement – a minor element in an overall excellent offer).
Alas, however, I’m not one of those who says “We would now be into Jeremy’s second term in office, after winning the 2022 GE.
Alas, I have to disagree. I believe he’d’ve lasted a fortnight before being toppled in a CIA-managed “A Very British Coup”, & clapped in the UK’s Guantanamo, HMP Belmarsh, & the country run by a “puppet” appointed by the Crown, under martial law, with no reference to Parliament.
I saw Jeremy up close
I liked him
I seriously doubted he was an anti-semite
But I do think he was naive, including on Brexit which he called totally incorrectly
That was what made him unsuited to govern, IMO
Exactly my thought (though I never met him) but it raises the question about the attempt of the Labour MPs to remove him.
Were they centrist saboteurs or doing the sensible thing? The Labour party seem divided.
Also worth pointing out that firstly the two child limit takes no account of where the children come from
So Mr & Mrs Smith have four children together and they are hit by the limit
Mr Jones & Mrs Patel have two children each , they meet up and move in together and get hit by the limit, although they dont have more than two each if that makes sense.
Mr Johnson on the other hand has kids all over the place but they live with their mothers so it doesnt hit him at all
A small update that I think is relevant: the North of Tyne Mayor, Jamie Driscoll has announced his resignation from the Labour Party and his intention to stand as an independent candidate in the up-coming (2024) election for North East Mayor provided that he can raise sufficient funds: £25k before the end of August and £150k total. The fundraiser passed the £25k mark after about 90 minutes.
Details in the link below:
https://www.facebook.com/NorthofTyneMayor/posts/pfbid0GY4XT6DQDhofep6Ga73JjmQnkhf9MywE9WwkyqmzNKAynaoYfp3piwxvcX3R4bfsl?comment_id=832201204903985¬if_id=1689602569644453¬if_t=feedback_reaction_generic&ref=notif
Interesting ….
The writing was on the wall; although the final straw might well have been that he stood for a photo op shoulder-to-shoulder between Ken Loach and Jeremy Corbyn on the hotel balcony during the recent Durham Miner’s Gala. A very clear and unmistakable two-fingers to Starmer and his lot.
He’s not guaranteed to win the election next year but I’d actually make him the favourite to win over Starmer’s selected candidate. At the very least the Labour Party are going to face a determined fight (Driscoll has authored a book on political campaigning) in what must be one of their safest spots.
Driscoll’s announcement appears to have caused quite a stir in the national media. I think Starmer and his advisors have made a significant mistake, although as ever only time will truly tell.
Cracks now beginning to appear in the Starmer Authoritarian and Fiscal Conservative Labour Party as Jamie Driscoll looks set to run as an independent for Mayor of the North-East. Election likely to be May 2024.
Actually it should be the Starmer Authoritarian and Fiscally Conservative Party! The Labour Party was established to be something completely different to be democratic and seek equitability.
Good for him. I wonder what Labour HQ will accuse him of doing/being to try and put a spanner in the works?
I see the Graun is sitting on the fence as usual.
An article from Owen Jones pointing out the ludicrousness of a Labour Party which says it won’t try and reduce child poverty at a relatively tiny cost in comparison to the rest of government spending, quickly followed by one from Polly Toynbee (wrong, yet again), appealing to us to give Starmer a chance, using the old, “He’s got to get elected first” argument.
If you only ever set policy by focus group, you’re heading for failure before you even start. If the people in the focus group are wrong or misinformed about a topic, you should be persuading them of this, not just tacitly agreeing to try and win power. No courage to do anything.
It seems to me that Starmer is trying to court the Murdoch/Rothermere/Barclay triumvirate, as they’re the ones who most manipulate public opinion in this country.
But it’s amounting to selling his soul to the devil, which never works out well.
Sir Starmer has already given (a la B.Liar – the war monger) fealty to the dirty digger. Who in turn gave Sir Vaccuous his papal blessing. The die has been cast, The Scum will support Liebore and we will have a B.Liar II gov, complete with the ghastly Mandelson. The only unknown is what brainless foreign adventure – instigated by the USA – Starmer will get sucked into. Probably Taiwan.
I can recognise a Labour strategy of trying not to give ‘soft’ Tory voters, fed up with the Tory government, reasons to not vote Labour. However, they now seem to be coming up with Tory-lite policies and messaging designed to actively appeal to a much wider group of Tory voters. Increasingly these are deeply off-putting to those on the progressive/centre-left. They seem to be just taking those votes for granted. Whats the chance that a lot of those voters just won’t bother to turn out? ‘A plague on all your houses’, reflecting a disillusionment with all of the parties. That 20% lead could wither away all too quickly.
I think your conclusion is right
I understand the frustrations with Starmer but these attacks on him and the Labour party will have only one outcome – a narrowing of the polls and the horrible possibility that the Conservatives will squeeze in again at the next election
Are people happy for that to happen because although this may not be the Labour party they want can we all not agree that for the good of the country’s sanity that we desperately need a change of government in 2024?
I also think that Central Office (is that what it’s still called?) will see blogs like this and be jumping for joy
I do not believe the Tories can win
Do I want a hung parliament? Yes.
Perhaps it would be wiser to wait for Labour’s manifesto to be published before writing off Keir Starmer.
Why?
He’s already talking about what he is going to do and is expelling those who disagree
Do you really think he is going to change?
https://skwawkbox.org/2023/07/17/sir-kid-starver-trends-in-uk-the-new-milk-snatcher-moment/
Think Sir Kid Starver’s days maybe numbered!!
I can’t truthfully convey how I feel about this… person … without using language that is not suitable nor warranted on your site Richard.
So I’ll let others fill it in for themselves. He’s an absolute shambles is the nicest description I can muster right now.
Is it any wonder us Scots want to leave this nuthouse?
It isn’t hard to figure out why those who call themselves fiscal conservatives are moronic like Sir Faux Starmer. What they can’t be bothered to do is analyse the factors that cause inflation.
It’s complex but there are at least seven main factors affecting the internal generation of inflation; whether real resources are available or not especially labour, whether there is a productivity level high enough to bear down on inflation, whether the tax system is equitable including government subsidies, whether private sector bank lending is out of control inflating the prices of resources, whether government creation of money is out of control, whether the savings rate is going to substantially change, and finally uncertainty means it’s very difficult , for a government to obtain data from the future to determine a steering strategy for the economy.
As far as external generation of inflation is concerned it’s hard to determine the stability of the currency when a country is not self-sustaining and needs to export. All kinds of factors determine the demand for exports but should it fall this can make imports more expensive and inflation goes up. Of course when a country currency rigs like China it’s hard to sustain the above correlation since Chinese imports will remain cheap and help offset internal inflation generation in the UK. This will also be true of developing economies starting to grow their exports.
All told it’s hard for a government to identify inflationary and deflationary factors and the mono-dimensional drive for fiscal conservatism that Starmer blindly focuses on is simply creating a Faux Labour Party that will sell the UK short economically and socially if Starmer gains office. Here is a paper he needs to read or at least Rachel Reeves, his shadow chancellor, which reveals that after a decade of trying to predict the above factors it’s more of an art than a science. Sir Faux needs to learn some humility!
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/monetary-policy-without-a-working-theory-of-inflation/
Thank you for an interesting link. I keep going back to Stephen Hawking:
“If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality.”
I see little or no relationship between work (much work is unpaid), employment, and income (employment income is taxed more highly than unearned income). If the important parameter is quality of life, we don’t even begin to look at how this can be maximised.
Agreed
Sir “Kid Starver” Starmer will this stick and influence sufficient voters whereas “I hate tree-huggers” won’t?
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23661741.sir-kid-starver-starmers-got-new-nickname-thanks-twitter-users/
The common wealth movement was set up to counter the influence of the establishment on Labour during the national coalition. It stood to ensure that the democracy that we were supposed to be fighting for was still being practiced. It seems in Eddisbury the local Tory sought replace the Liberal MP, clearly not playing fair as by-elections were to be uncontested. Wherever the NEC or central party has imposed a candidate then it is fair for the local Labour members to select a commonwealth movement candidate to stand against those that are clear interlopers. First suggestion is Wigan so we can rid our movement of the hateful princess Lisa Nandos.
FAUX POLITICIANS AND FISCAL CONSERVATISM
I think you can safely say that the UK is immiserated with “faux politicians” of whom Keir Starmer is a classic example. It is not merely moronic but grossly irresponsible to simply announce you’re a “fiscal conservative” in regard to keeping prices stable when the causes of inflation are actually quite complex and those who’ve had the responsibility to pursue this but also believe in the virtue of honesty admit there is no working theory of inflation! Indeed in a sense one of the central concerns of Richard’s blog is to repeatedly point this fact out. It’s easy enough to spot how fiscal conservatism has come to create “faux” politics in the UK simply go look at the parties manifestoes where they seek to justify the cost of their policy proposals.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/monetary-policy-without-a-working-theory-of-inflation/
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/18/sector-pay-rises-10-per-cent-add-little-to-inflation-uk-thinktank-ippr-rishi-sunak
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/18/vast-growth-in-value-of-england-rentals-since-1990-would-have-built-3m-council-homes
https://www.libdems.org.uk/fileadmin/groups/2_Federal_Party/Documents/From_NB/Stop_Brexit_and_Build_a_Brighter_Future_COSTINGS.pdf
I agree with what you are saying, but under FPTP you have to lie to get elected. Hold your nose, vote tactically, then judge & pressure on actions is the only hope.
Sorry – but Starmer has gone too far for that
Here’s the latest in the theory that Starmer/Reeves plan to get into power & then undergo the Damascene conversion. It is from Polly Toynbee in this morning’s Guardian……
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/17/labour-critics-record-keir-starmer-election-britain?utm_term=64b60e51bc6cba2fb0336bc280b01d17&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayUK&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=GTUK_email
I really would like to believe this, but I’m still not buying it.
As an aside or PS, on the subject of getting rid of “useless” UNI courses, why not start with PPE……wadddyallthink?
I have argued with Polly on and off since 1982, as I recall.
I would happily argue with her about this.
I completely agree. Steve Richards, in his rock and roll politics Podcast, makes the point that the vocabulary of this article almost exactly mirrors that of Tony Blair before he was first elected. It’s so disappointing that, with such an appetite for change, particularly amongst all the younger ones, he’s so unwilling to articulate a vision for a future that would provide – well, I’m not afraid to say it “for the money, not the food“.
Totally agree with this, my suggestion for what starting now might look like can be found here.
https://brianfishhope.com/index.php/part-4-act
And specifically
https://brianfishhope.com/index.php/tactics/organisation
Some suggestion for individual action can be found here.
https://brianfishhope.com/index.php/supplements/125-four-things-to-do-in-2021
Personally I’d like to see two campaigns
(1) The 2032 Reform Act – to create a new settlement with massive devolution and building in participatory democracy elements.
It would be the bi-centennial of 1832 when it all began, it took till 1928 to complete the process, now we can see a new settlement is desperately needed. This would be a good thing to hang the campaign on – its watchword would be “anything for me, without me, is against me” It should cover corporate governance as well as political processes because as we know it is “political economy”
(2) To get Progressive Independent candidates into parliament – by holding the balance of power this group can facilitate change, by being free of party discipline they are free to think.
The electoral alliance of Compass (I am a member) is going to deliver Starmer so I also despair.
I hesitate to derail the electoral alliance and tactical voting campaigns. Even with a slight chance that the other parties’ price for Confidence and Supply might be PR it’s better, I don’t want to see a Tory government returned. However an alternative needs time and in FPTP it is still be a big stretch. So this should be for 2029 but we should start now.
Background; in the c18, before parties become dominant (and accepting there was a minority class based system) there was a significant number of MPs who would support anyone who could put a government together.
My chapter on “The Hope Association” is the second most read piece of my “booK”, nearly 6K readers (the site has 35k hits). BUT I’m 70, not networked into the left and not a “personality” I need help so set this up.
Too too many politicians seek a majority to do their pet projects, or to just be in charge. What matters is having a process for thrashing out a consensus – that means taking to people who don’t share our worldview because they live here as well so we have to work it out. What matters is the process, the best outcomes can be found by trial and error and feedback.
I don’t want to run anything, just to set it going… anyone…get in touch or take it and run with it.
I am still a Labour member and will still vote Labour unless a new left party starts that looks to have a chance. Mick Lynch says this is all we can do and pressurise Labour if they win the General Election.
I don’t think Labour members can remove Starmer. All we can do is vote for leftwing NEC members to exert influence – and even then Starmer can remove them on spurious grounds.
Starmer ignores conference votes – such as overwhelming support for PR
I would like Zara Sultana to be our leader, young, passionate, articulate, energetic and charming – also a woman and MP in north of England not London. However there will be no election for leader if PLP support Starmer.
He might be not elected in his constituency as the left are mounting a rival candidate independently. I don’t know what happens then.
JC was a good man, I heard him speak twice in Cornwall and met him in a small meeting of 12. He was undermined by the right in his own party as “Jeremy Corbyn -the big lie’ shows. Please see this film-parts are online now. It is shocking.
As for economics-modern monetary theory remains a secret from most people including MPs. If it can be made public and discussed widely things might change.
I urge folk to publicise Richard’s articles by sharing to their fb etc. Ask tv to cover MMT and to have him on more.
Thanks