Starmer's vision quest

[Psamathe]

I think Khan is wrong about Burnham, especially after how well Reform did in Manchester.

Maybe a question of priority? What is more important Manchester Mayor party allegiance or getting a PM who can do the job for the entire UK.

Not that I think Burnham can do the job of PM, I don't know enough about him but clearly a fair few Labour MPs think he can so for them, having a "good" Labour Mayor vs having a "good" PM for the entire country.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I don't believe that Burnham really wants to take the risk of not finding a 'safe' seat given the success of Reform in northern Red Wall areas.

I was disappointed in him for giving up his seat after losing out in the idiocy that was the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader. He just had to wait for the inevitable implosion caused by Corbyn and he would have been leader.

 

[Stevo 666]

Did you vote Reform Stevo? You'd be ideally placed to explain the logic. A bit like those vox pop things the BBC are so fond of.

Nope. Now try answering the question.

 

[Psamathe]

Without wanting to start a blow by blow account, news this evening reporting 50 Labour MPs not publicly called for Starmer to go as well as (or including?) two ministerial aids (one working for Wes Streeting). Surprised it's so high.

Blow by blow update
Edit: Guardian now reporting 60 https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-mps-call-on-starmer-to-set-timetable-to-quit

 

[Stevo 666]

Without wanting to start a blow by blow account, news this evening reporting 50 Labour MPs not publicly called for Starmer to go as well as (or including?) two ministerial aids (one working for Wes Streeting). Surprised it's so high.

Blow by blow update
And 12 mins into mews up to 55 Labour MPs gone public with "he should go". Just surprised at the numbers that high.

Over 60 now apparently.

I see no issue with a blow by blow account of such a fun event.

 

[Stevo 666]

I don't think letting Burnham back into the commons will make any difference in the end. Labour look f****d and if anything, having someone like him in charge will only hasten the end of Labour's time in government.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I don't think letting Burnham back into the commons will make any difference in the end. Labour look f****d and if anything, having someone like him in charge will only hasten the end of Labour's time in government.

The same applies to the Tories, despite Badenoch trying to steal Reform's clothes. It is clear that at a time of great dissatisfaction with the government of the country the ruling party will suffer the backlash but at such a time you would normally expect the main opposition to benefit instead of making huge losses to add to those they suffered in the last GE.

The rise of Reform and, to a lesser extent the Greens, plus the nats in Scotland and Wales is not only to do with left or right but more to giving the established parties a kicking. I believe, if you ask those people who have voted for Reform why they did the answer would be "well they can't do any worse" without having a clue what their policies are other than stopping the boats and kicking the unwelcome immigrants out of the country.

Farage receiving a "personal gift" of £5m by the main party donor is apparently less important or "corrupt" than Starmer being given a pair of glasses and a sharp suit according to the MSM.

 

[Psamathe]

• Nationalise British Steel - is that really going to make the electorate change their mind.

Steel seems to be as totemic as fishing in the UK psyche: pretty piddlingly small, but get loads of attention.

OTOH, the university sector is worth about £250bn, and yet (partly because it attracts a lot of foreign students) it's being allowed to fall into pretty serious crisis without any real attention.

Thinking more about Steel nationalisation, I think the case for it is detailed and complex and most of the electorate won't give it a 2nd glance so as a reset policy to recover votes a complete waste of time.

But had he eg "We are going to nationalise the water industry, return our rivers to be rivers not open sewers, to make our beaches safe for you and your children to swim in ..." it might have got him a lot more attention, even positive reactions.

 

[BoldonLad]

The same applies to the Tories, despite Badenoch trying to steal Reform's clothes. It is clear that at a time of great dissatisfaction with the government of the country the ruling party will suffer the backlash but at such a time you would normally expect the main opposition to benefit instead of making huge losses to add to those they suffered in the last GE.

The rise of Reform and, to a lesser extent the Greens, plus the nats in Scotland and Wales is not only to do with left or right but more to giving the established parties a kicking. I believe, if you ask those people who have voted for Reform why they did the answer would be "well they can't do any worse" without having a clue what their policies are other than stopping the boats and kicking the unwelcome immigrants out of the country.

Farage receiving a "personal gift" of £5m by the main party donor is apparently less important or "corrupt" than Starmer being given a pair of glasses and a sharp suit according to the MSM.

Would agree with the bolded bit.

No doubt, the reasons for the "kicking" may vary regionally, but, IMHO, one common factor is that neither Labour or Conservatives actually understand WHY they are being kicked. Equally, I am not sure that Greens and Reform actually know WHY they are in the ascendancy.

 

[Dorset Boy]

It's sounding like it might well be over for Starmer - Streeting to announce a challenge tonight or tomorrow is the suggestion on Sky

 

[BoldonLad]

Thinking more about Steel nationalisation, I think the case for it is detailed and complex and most of the electorate won't give it a 2nd glance so as a reset policy to recover votes a complete waste of time.

But had he eg "We are going to nationalise the water industry, return our rivers to be rivers not open sewers, to make our beaches safe for you and your children to swim in ..." it might have got him a lot more attention, even positive reactions.

In the short term, probably, but, when they fail to deliver?

It may be different in the "leafy suburbs" but, in the former Industrial areas of the UK, the rivers and seas (where applicable) were actually MUCH worse in the past, in terms of pollution.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Thinking more about Steel nationalisation, I think the case for it is detailed and complex and most of the electorate won't give it a 2nd glance so as a reset policy to recover votes a complete waste of time.

But had he eg "We are going to nationalise the water industry, return our rivers to be rivers not open sewers, to make our beaches safe for you and your children to swim in ..." it might have got him a lot more attention, even positive reactions.

As long as we don't return to the chronic underfunding of the water system that led to filthy rivers and beaches of the 70s and 80s and was reversed in the early days of privatisation before going backwards again as profits went to shareholders rather than reinvestment. I am not against nationalisation but it is not in itself a panacea.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

I think that's the stated reason, but I genuinely wonder how much UK steel is used and is crucial to UK-produced 'defence' materiel. I'd have hoped that European steel would always be available to UK defence manufacturers. If not, we're cooked anyway.

Not much, my business is dependent on steel. The UK imports more steel than it produces, we are more reliant on EU steel than British made.

 

[Dorset Boy]

As long as we don't return to the chronic underfunding of the water system that led to filthy rivers and beaches of the 70s and 80s and was reversed in the early days of privatisation before going backwards again as profits went to shareholders rather than reinvestment. I am not against nationalisation but it is not in itself a panacea.

The current system would work if the regulators had a spine.
Set standards and if they are not met, suspend the remuneration of the board members and senior managers until those standards are met.
And no dividends allowed to be paid when the set standards are not met.

 

[Psamathe]

C4 News Political Correspondent made a point this evening about Starmer's speech and "reset". He was saying they've known this was coming for months. Known what would happen and when it would happen so they've had months to prepare. And Starmer's failed "reset speech" is the best all those experts could come up with.