I struggled with Keir Starmer's speech yesterday.
The most obvious question to ask was ‘why' did he make it? It seemed like nothing more than mild reiteration of promises made during the election campaign, so what was all the fuss about?
The next question was, ‘what' did he hope to achieve? Is it his belief that restating goals that are already failing for him might be sufficient to persuade people that he is on track? If so, I think he's seriously mistaken.
The third obvious question was, ‘how' did he think this would be received? I think that Beth Rigby from Sky News summed up the most likely reaction when she told him during the press question session that she was confused by what he had to say. I am sure that many people will be.
To continue the obvious sequence, the ‘when' all this might happen appeared to have been answered by Starmer himself. Sometime by 2029 appears to be the goal. So, what's up? It would seem that, like Boris Johnson, the only thing that Starmer is really interested in doing is campaigning, and that what the speech was really all about was launching the 2029 election campaign.
Perhaps the most bizarre element of all of this is, however, to be found in the answer to the quite appropriate ‘where' question because, as I mentioned in a Tweet I also posted here yesterday, at least four of the six objectives, goals, milestones or whatever else that he wishes to describe them as, related to responsibilities devolved to the governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland over which, as a consequence, Starmer has remarkably little control. In that case, the answer to this question would appear to be in England alone, which for someone who is as an unreasonably determined and small-minded unionist is strange. Alternatively, it provided the very clear indication that he really does not know what he was talking about.
That last suggestion was reinforced by his objective of having at least 75% of all children ready for school by the age of five. It would seem that he thinks that's when children enter reception classes. The reality is that it is now quite exceptional that a child starts school in England at the age of five because, as a matter of policy, they start at the beginning of the school year in which they are five. In other words, they start at age four and in some cases (for example, in the case of one of my sons, with a late August birthday) that means they start at school when they are only just four. Is he really so unaware that he does not know this?
That made me wonder what Starmer is really all about. If, after all, he thought it appropriate to summon the media to this debacle he must have thought it would provide some insight into his thinking. I believe it did. What it showed is that he, like Rachel Reeves, is a man who thinks that government is about sweating over the figures on a spreadsheet. He has obviously persuaded himself, or been persuaded by others, that if only he can tick some boxes then his work will be done and the country will be truly satisfied with his performance.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Senior management is nothing like that, even if too much middle management is. Instead, senior management is about creating the narratives that will explain to people how you will keep them happy. Starmer is nowhere near doing that. That is why he is failing, and nothing he did yesterday will change that.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
An accurate summary IMO
I agree strongly with the conclusion. This battle will be fought on appealing to human nature and much less on an arbitrary set of goals, even if they are all achieved. Over the pond this was ignored and now they are soon to have a neo-fascist in power.
Farage’s advertising budget will be bolstered by tens of millions of pounds by Musk. The right wing media are creating harmful narratives to create fear so that a charlatan with a long history of making noise on populist issues can swoop in.
It’s not about how logical Starmer can be – he’s a lawyer, he can win a debate. This doesn’t necessarily translate to convincing the country he is achieving the right results.
I question whether Starnmer can win a debate
He’s like Eric Morecambe – all the right words, not necessarily in the right order
Objecting on behalf on Eric Morecambe! He was nothing like that wooden, Atlanticist marionette Starmer.
🙂
Starmer – a knight of the realm – is operating it seems in a bubble as per usual, a bubble created by the previous government ‘hard working people’ and all that.
Labour – in fact most of our politicians – are very insular to be honest, as are many of our more well-off people who patronise people like Starmer.
England – a Christian country whose prophet was particularly interested in the plight of the poor?
Not really. I’ve never seen such disinterested politicians.
‘Disinterested’ – that is what they are.
So, likewise, I’m not interested in them.
As far as Scotland is concerned, they, the Labour Government, have already stated that they will bypass the Scottish Parliament, and take decisions in areas which are devolved. No surprise, as we are considered a colony by Westminster, and they can impose whatever dik-tat they decide, without consultation.
I did try watching the speech, honest I did.
But it was too painful. Excruciating, banal, insulting, almost pathetically needy, devoid of significant content. Meaningless. A speech about delivering change, that couldn’t tell us how that change would be delivered.
Yet more vague aspirational dreaming.
I couldn’t go on.
Some odd breaks in the feed too.
I might manage the text, if I can find it on gov.uk.
But watch more than 5 minutes of it? Life is too short.
If that’s the relaunch, we are in big trouble. Give F***g* the keys now.
In answering the question ‘where’, you say that SKS is “an unreasonably determined and small-minded unionist” who is either only speaking for England or doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Is there a 3rd option?
Could it be that he (or maybe not him but his advisors) is/are well aware of what’s reserved/devolved? But being unreasonably determined unionists have decided that they’ll make decisions that they’ve decided work (for them) for the “whole country” of the UK. And if the other 3 countries object they’ll follow tory policy of overriding their decisions on the grounds that they interfere with UK policy?
I suppose that to suggest that might imply some sort of malign intelligence – which I’m sure isn’t your intention, or mine. Just wondering.
Possible
Labour is doomed to who knows what, same with Tories, LibDems and Reform. Actually it seems they all are aiming for authoritarian govt of a subdued obedient apathetic electorate.
They are all on the same song sheet. Horrible position for Brits with a rudderless govt and any possible alternatives all peddling failed whatever they call their style. A true social community orientated left leaning putsch from inside Labour similar to its old style is the only hope for labour in my opinion. SNP in Scotland could do with more of the same remedy, though they are marginally better than labour.
The current paradigm of austerity government is antisocial behaviour. Starmer and Reeves know that so it defines them and their govt. The end result obviously being engineered is less and less voter engagement in the whole democratic process.
I really like the ‘guilty of antisocial behaviour’ assertion. That sums Labour up precisely. They are no more socialist than Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos. To say that very many Labour supporters are bitterly disappointed is an understatement. I was thinking of cancelling my membership of the party, but really the best thing to do is stay and do what I can to try and change things. Admittedly, this doesn’t seem to be very much except vote in elections to the National Executive. I’m not an activist and don’t really want to get involved in local politics. Reading this blog and comments helps a lot, so thanks Richard and other regular contributors.
Thanks
I did try and use my Labour membership, at CLP (told that we couldn’t discuss certain things), sitting on selection committees (had our candidates rejected and replaced by regionally appointed substitutes), voted for NEC (had NEC bypassed/over-ruled), then finally, watched a twice-elected leader, who I had campaigned for in GE2019, sabotaged from within his own party, (because they preferred to see Johnson in No.10 than Corbyn with Brexit chaos, Covid chaos & corruption), and then they deposed Corbyn, with his successor deliberately, cynically, lying his way through the hustings while they weaponised AS (again) against any other candidates they didn’t like the look of.
Members have NO influence now, unless they agree with Starmer/Reeves and Assaf Kaplan has given them the IDF Unit 8200 clean bill of health.
If MPs got together, they could do to Starmer what MPs earlier did to Corbyn, but they would have to be united, quick and ruthless, otherwise he will simply withdraw the whip like he did to Corbyn & others.
The battle must be fought by defeating the “we can’t afford it” argument, wherever it is deployed, on the airwaves or in print, and when gossipped on street and in homes. Relentlessly. Till it is seen to be ridiculous by the people at street level and its proponents laughed at and shamed into recantation.
I’ll maybe listen to Starmer when he understands the meaning of the word “genocide”. Until then I’m not prepared to believe anything he says .
Anthony Seldon- who apparently has been, or still is, honorary historian advisor to 10 Downing Street, said on last night’s Newsnight , what you are saying Richard – Starmer should be framing the narrative – and ‘making people happy’, not ticking his boxes or checking his spreadsheets. .
But that’s the thing he doesnt do and apparently cant do.
The whole Newsnight discussion was about his criticism of the civil service – not about about his ‘milestones’.
The event seems an irrelevance at best and a disaster at worst.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/dec/06/keir-starmer-labour-housebuilding-uk-politics-latest-news?page=with:block-6752ca8f8f08065f386f2060#block-6752ca8f8f08065f386f2060
It’s true. The only thing McSweeney can apply his mind to is electioneering.
They have no plan for delivery of anything resembling solutions for the ordinary people.
The plan is entirely one of “persuasion” and rhetoric, aimed at 2029, not 2025. deception not delivery, and because they have no understanding of what is really going on out here, they will fail, and Fa***e will sail into Downing St.
Keir Starmer can’t provide the answers, because he is asking the wrong questions. Bernie Sanders and Jon Stewart have a very interesting discussion here on YouTube that asks the real questions that Starmer, and the US government shoul be asking. It focuses on the problems in the US, but it is highly instructive as to what will be in store for us if we follow the US economic model – which we are.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4vtiiIo_Bc
You, RIchard, have talked about these issues constantly, and Bernie Sanders is on eactly the same wavelength.
I have some routine tasks to do and will listen to that
Thanks
The discussion starts at 3 minutes in.
Well worth watching. Bernie is a breath of fresh air. A real socialist, while being aware of the difficulties of dealing with the plutocrats and oligarchs who have captured the government in many countries, especially the US. Most of the topics covered could easily be applied to UK. Especially, his views on corruption in politics.
A good interview
I watched it last night
He is an absolute ####***%%£@!!%%&**
He genuinely awakens the anger in me that I usually have well in check!
Does anyone im Labour outside of his coterie actually believe that he’s a Labour politician?
The country obviously doesn’t.
Please do not allow your child to go to school at four. An extra year of unstructured and unpressured time will greatly lessen the trauma. Even five is much too early, as I’m sure you know.
Agreed, 18 years too late.
Starmer reminds me of one of my bosses, Monday morning was the dreaded meeting, to discuss and analysis the previous weeks trading figures.
Just walking into the board room there was a sense of dread, sitting at the head of the boardroom table he would have the figures in front of him, papers covered in red ink!!
We each gave our presentations, because of the diversity of the business and some inherited issues, it was always a mixed bag. However the boss could never get past the negatives and was blind to the positives, so the meeting would descend in the gloom of despair and recriminations, not seeing that if he truly understood the business and his role as ‘leader’ the meetings would have been far more productive and enjoyable.
I did ask him once why the negativity and anger, he said his job was to turn this business around, to present a rosy picture to main board on Thursday but he could not see solutions only problems, to which I replied, maybe if you listened more you would see we were slowly producing results on a business that the previous management have left in a poor state.
Fridays after the main board meeting no one came into the office preferring to go into the branches, with the secretary saying he would just sit with his hands in his head for the entire day, no doubt getting ready to rerun the Monday meeting with the same perception of gloom and doom.
Starmer strikes me as the same, rerunning in his head a situational construction of his own making that would never improve, as he is firmly in a rut and without the skill of leadership and vision needed for the task at hand which actually is not as dire has convinced it is.
BBC chief Political correspondent , Henry Zeffman. is writing
Labour politicians think Cummings was right
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyv2g2pe5ro
Indeed! Wasn’t his aim simply to blame for the government’s inaction on Whitehall?