Starmer's vision quest

[secretsqirrel]

I think there's an admission here somewhere that the markets are content with Reeves

They did have a wobble when Rachel cried, and then stabilised when she stopped.

 

[Shortfall]

Nothing in there to refute the suggestion that the markets are content with Reeves as Chancellor. Furthermore they seem to have reacted positively to the November statements. In fact I recall people on here howling for her to go as the public finances were in *better* shape than they thought.

Obviously the economic hellscape of your imagination may tell a different story

The economic hellscape is what might happen if Labour lose control of the public finances again. It tends to happen. Atlee was forced to devalue Sterling by 30%, then Wilson was forced to devalue by15%, then Callaghan had to go to the IMF for a bailout. But go ahead, make the case for any Reeves is do ing a good job.

 

[Pblakeney]

Yup, pretty widely noted that it was a weak landslide.

Also widely predicted, by which I mean by me, that the main opposition party was actually Labour rather than the Tories.

I think it was mostly agreed over on BR that a landslide victory is the worst result for everyone.
The infighting just never ends as can be seen in the current administration, and the last.

 

[the snail]

The economic hellscape is what might happen if Labour lose control of the public finances again. It tends to happen. Atlee was forced to devalue Sterling by 30%, then Wilson was forced to devalue by15%, then Callaghan had to go to the IMF for a bailout. But go ahead, make the case for any Reeves is do ing a good job.

Labour generally have a better record on the economy, the tories are generally useless. Starmer and Reeves are delivering what they said they would - basically like the tories only more competent. You tory fanboys should be happy bunnies.

 

[Shortfall]

Labour generally have a better record on the economy, the tories are generally useless. Starmer and Reeves are delivering what they said they would - basically like the tories only more competent. You tory fanboys should be happy bunnies.

I'm not a Tory fanboy but I appreciate your sense of humour. How's the laser focus on growth working out?

 

[BoldonLad]

He got the mandate under the rules by which general elections operate. It may not be fair but Labour played the rules and got a landslide. That was down to McSweeney, he has his uses I suppose.

I thought that bit was quite straight forward, but I forgot the nuance bit.

I mean, ask any brexiteer they would say, get over it wouldn’t they?

Don’t disagree with any of that. I was querying the suggestion that because Starmer/Labour got voted into power, they had the support/approval of the majority of the electorate or even those who actually voted.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Was McSweeney really a factor in the win?
The country wanted a change, and many, many just voted to get the Tories out. It wasn't some tactical electoral genius pulling the strings to get Labour voted in.

The markets are accepting of Reeves, but not happy with her, duer to her incompetence of leaks and u-turns in the months leading up to the budget, and her stated aim of growth which she holed below the water line in her first budget.

They are more worried about the uncertainty that her departure and that of Starmer would bring. Markets do not like uncertainty.

 

[spen666]

A caller on radio this morning made interesting point.

As DPP ( not reviewing lawyer) the CPS decided not to prosecuted Jimmy Saville

As PM he initially refused to hold any inquiries into alleged grooming gangs

He appointed Lord Mandelson despite his known association with convicted paedophile Epstein.

He appointed paedophile supporter Tim Allan as a Lord
He failed to stop the appointment of Allan as a Lord when Sunday Times revealed his support for a paedophile before he took his Lordship up.


Caller asked hiw many "mistakes" can one person make references paedophiles

 

[Bromptonaut]

A caller on radio this morning made interesting point.

As DPP ( not reviewing lawyer) the CPS decided not to prosecuted Jimmy Savile (sp)

The evidence against Savile at the time wasn't sufficient*.

We forget that at his death and funeral he was still a national treasure. Only when he was in his grave was there a veritable landslide of allegations.

*If time/effort had been put into ensuring the three (?) women who came forward in his lifetime knew of each other's existence and wouldn't be alone it is possible a case could have been made that cleared the prosecution threshold. But that was a the conclusion of a review with hindsight after the true scale of is activities were in the open.

 

[CXRAndy]

Another islamist stabbing kids in the UK.

Just put him on a watch list do nothing Starmer

 

[spen666]

The evidence against Savile at the time wasn't sufficient*.

We forget that at his death and funeral he was still a national treasure. Only when he was in his grave was there a veritable landslide of allegations.

*If time/effort had been put into ensuring the three (?) women who came forward in his lifetime knew of each other's existence and wouldn't be alone it is possible a case could have been made that cleared the prosecution threshold. But that was a the conclusion of a review with hindsight after the true scale of is activities were in the open.

Its a bit like the Lucy Letby case, take each incident on its own ( I mean the 4 examples the caller gave- not saville's actions but could with hindsight equally apply to Saville's actions and building a case against him) and its possible to explain and justify each decision.

However, when a pattern starts to emerge it does raises questions

At the very least, its not good for his reputation.

 

[CXRAndy]

UK growth almost flat lining

UK construction hits 4 year low

Well done Rachel and Starmer

 

[icowden]

Its a bit like the Lucy Letby case,

What - a miscarriage of justice?

 

[CXRAndy]

Jim Ratcliffe accused of hypocrisy

Saying UK colonised by immigrants. For he lives in Monaco


He was mis quoted I believe

The UK is colonised by scrounging free loading immigrants

 

[Bromptonaut]

Its a bit like the Lucy Letby case, take each incident on its own ( I mean the 4 examples the caller gave- not saville's actions but could with hindsight equally apply to Saville's actions and building a case against him) and its possible to explain and justify each decision.

However, when a pattern starts to emerge it does raises questions

At the very least, its not good for his reputation.

Taking them together was more or less what the review after Savile's death said. But even then it might not have stood up as the complainants were equivocal about giving evidence and submitting to tough cross examination by the best lawyers Savile's money could buy.

I'm not saying Starmer has got everything right, he's clearly got a lot wrong. But blaming him for the fact Savile wasn't charged smacks of desperation. It was Boris Johnson's use of that against Starmer that led to one of his senior aides resigning in protest.