Starmer's vision quest

[Pblakeney]

One really does have to wonder where Starmer is getting his political prompts from, because I'm pretty sure its not from normal people., or on the doorstep. In fact, I'm not aware of any channels where defence is anywhere on the list of 'concerns'. It's almost as if he doesn't want to talk about immigration or the EU, because he knows he's out of step with likely/lost Labour supporters.

View attachment 15155

Just as a nitpicking exercise, is it Starmer focussing on defence or the author?
I suspect that this spending is just approving spending already announced.

 

[briantrumpet]

Just as a nitpicking exercise, is it Starmer focussing on defence or the author?
I suspect that this spending is just approving spending already announced.

Nit-picking doesn't seem like terribly useful exercise, at least as far as the cardiovascular system is concerned. I prefer a brisk walk or bike ride myself. Or weights. And I don't think that lifting nits counts as 'weights'.

 

[Pblakeney]

Nit-picking doesn't seem like terribly useful exercise, at least as far as the cardiovascular system is concerned. I prefer a brisk walk or bike ride myself. Or weights. And I don't think that lifting nits counts as 'weights'.

That's about as much as I can be bothered with today after an "extremely enjoyable" day yesterday.
A perfect day for watching a cycling stage race. 😉

 

[briantrumpet]

If Streeting is part of a leadership contest, it'll be interesting to hear others' responses to his pitch, including his clear view that overcautiousness on making the case for the EU and the calamity of Brexit needs addressing.

 

[Psamathe]

One really does have to wonder where Starmer is getting his political prompts from, because I'm pretty sure its not from normal people., or on the doorstep. In fact, I'm not aware of any channels where defence is anywhere on the list of 'concerns'. It's almost as if he doesn't want to talk about immigration or the EU, because he knows he's out of step with likely/lost Labour supporters.

View attachment 15155

Just as a nitpicking exercise, is it Starmer focussing on defence or the author?
I suspect that this spending is just approving spending already announced.

He announced lots of increases in defence spending ages ago but virtually none has happened.

From back in March this year

UK defence firms ‘bleeding cash’ as delayed spending plan leaves industry in ‘paralysis’
Defence manufacturers are going bust while others have been left in “paralysis” and “bleeding cash” as they wait for a long-delayed UK military spending plan for the next decade, MPs have heard.

Industry groups said a more than six-month delay to the defence investment plan (DIP) had also left the UK behind Germany and the US in attracting cash from global investor

(my bold and large font)
Last I heard it still hasn't happened. We're supposedly worried about our defence capabilities yet doing nothing about it except delay. And that's a political delay.

 

[briantrumpet]

He announced lots of increases in defence spending ages ago but virtually none has happened.

From back in March this year

(my bold and large font)
Last I heard it still hasn't happened. We're supposedly worried about our defence capabilities yet doing nothing about it except delay. And that's a political delay.

Thanks. All that said, it seems like a weird thing to home in on right now.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

For Labour (as a Party) winning is a big deal. If Burnham, local lad, great reputation in the area "King of the North" can't beat Reform then alarm bells would be ringing long and loud across Labour, all those backbenchers who see the reality of losing their seats). Confirmation they are toast. And that would likely reflect on their authoritarian leader who has been determining their direction taking them to this point.

If Burnham wins then he will be the saviour of Labour, the person who can beat Reform. I wonder if at that point Starmer might step down as Burnham taking over is a foregone conclusion and maybe he would consider Foreign Secretary as a consolation prize (maybe he's too proud).

I don't know how things will pan out, but if Starmer did end up stepping down, and he wasn't too proud, FS is a good shout and a role he is far better suited to.

 

[Stevo 666]

The punchline should be "vote Labour" as a Burnham win means Starmer is likely to be replaced. I get the joke, but as it is about undermining Starmer, he missed a trick with this. 'Supporting' Starmer by putting him out of his misery is far more cutting.

Quite possibly, but IMO Labour are screwed whoever ends up as PM after this episode.

 

[BoldonLad]

It seems to be mirroring the football world where the usual response to a bad run of results is to change the manager. This is actively encouraged by the sporting press as it generates even more headlines and inside-knowledge exclusives for the reporters than the football itself.

I would suspect the Managers don’t mind either, they get a pay-off, have a little break, then, get to manage another team, and, with luck, repeat the cycle.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I would suspect the Managers don’t mind either, they get a pay-off, have a little break, then, get to manage another team, and, with luck, repeat the cycle.

Political leaders kicked out by their parties very rarely, if ever, get another such job.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

Quite possibly, but IMO Labour are screwed whoever ends up as PM after this episode.

I wouldn't necessarily say so. Burnham does have that down to earth effect, and unlike Farage, his is genuine. I think the by-election will show a lot. There is a real chance he loses, but there is also a real chance he wins and potentially even increases the Labour majority there. If the latter happens and he then becomes PM I think he will win back quite a lot of Labour voters.

 

[briantrumpet]

I think this a vaguely fair comment.

I've found Streeting's comments so far interesting, now he's no longer constrained by being a minister. He's still getting vitriolic comments about the Palantir deal, and his trans viewpoint, from a certain section of Labour supporters, but his "We will have to rejoin the EU eventually" and defence of immigration will force those aspects to be addressed by Burnham, Starmer (assuming he stands) and anyone else who fancies their chances. As Streeting says, those debates have been stifled for too long, as Starmer has been pointlessly courting the Reform vote rather than leading the discussion, and has used his control of the PLP to stop proper discussion.

 

[Stevo 666]

I wouldn't necessarily say so. Burnham does have that down to earth effect, and unlike Farage, his is genuine. I think the by-election will show a lot. There is a real chance he loses, but there is also a real chance he wins and potentially even increases the Labour majority there. If the latter happens and he then becomes PM I think he will win back quite a lot of Labour voters.

Maybe so, but (like the other leadership contenders) he has naff all business experience and an understanding of economics that is at best tenuous. That does not bode well for us.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

an understanding of economics that is at best tenuous

He did tell me he's fully conversant with the utility of the Laffer curve.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Surely you can't argue with this one @Stevo 666?
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...nergy-water-under-public-control-keir-starmer