They've still got the crackpots. I see Rupa Huq did her best to sabotage Starmer's big day. Decent speech overall I thought. I do hope the sums have been done though and the strategy isn't to screech 'FULLY COSTED' at anyone asking how all this will work. Being just as profligate as the Tories have been this week won't fly because Labour have years of previous.
Half a Labour leader's job is keeping the crackpots under control isn't it? I don't think they'll ever get rid of them unless the party splits. I never trust them when they say things like that. Its all very well saying everything will be fully costed but we all know they'll encounter problems once they're in power and they'll have to get down off their high horses.
Must admit I admire Starmer. He’s going to reintroduce the 45% tax rate to higher earners and give all primary school children free breakfasts, using that method he could reduce the tax bill to 0% and then reintroduce it and he will have it all to spend again, brilliant
Must admit I admire Starmer... Liz Truss seems unlikely to take Starmer’s advice, and perform a U-turn, even though that could potentially solve the sterling crisis. Starmer probably realises that having the opposition call for a U-turn makes it, politically, even harder for the government to perform one.
Which is fantastic for his election campaign but not so good for the general population who will have to wait longer for the crisis to be resolved. Labour; looking after the working man.
Is it?! That's not what I was I saying. My point is, all of this politicking doesn't actually do anyone, other than the politicians themselves, any good.
Is it? Your comment was anti Starmer, when the mess we are in is not his doing. The government has been in power 12 years, they have made poor decisions and lost control of the economy.
My comment was anti-politician. Starmer made a (fairly) good speech yesterday and has got the Labour party back into a position where they might be electable but that doesn't make him immune from criticism.
If, by publically pointing out that Truss and Kwarteng need to recant on their budget, it prevents them doing so (as you suggested), that's not good for the country but will aid his election campaign as it will make the Conservatives even less electable. Putting his election campaign ahead of the needs of the country would be contradictory to the statement he made yesterday about his leadership being "country first, party second". That's not anti-Labour, it just pointing out a possible contradiction.
Spot on Smug, there are crackpots in the conservative party, in recent months we have had Imran Ahmad Khan, Neil Parish and Chris Pincher to reinforce that. There are crackpots in all walks of life and as a manager/leader its how you deal with these people that count. Starmer has introduced a disciplinary system that ensures there will be no repeat of the Corbyn days where allegations of anti-Semitism were not investigated. The very day that Rupa Huq made this racist comment, she was suspended, had the whip removed and an investigation commissioned. In my view Starmer should be applauded for the positive and assertive leadership he has demonstrated. Just remind me how Chris Pincher was dealt with when he was accused by two people of sexual misconduct in 2017, I remember now, he retained the party whip and Theresa May made him chief whip two months later. Then Johnson made him the chief whip again in 2022 despite rumours of sexual misconduct and was forced to resign as PM after further allegations of Pinchers sexual misconduct came to fruition.
I agree with the bit in bold. I think there's a difference between 'crackpots' and criminals though. My comment about the Labour leader having to keep the crackpots under control was based on the fact that the Labour party have always had an element that was so far to the left that it made those individuals (i.e. the crackpots) objects of ridicule to the outside world and unpalatable to the average voter. Examples are people like Corbyn, who until he was inexplicably made leader was widely considered to be a joke, and George Galloway.
I wouldn't expect anything else. It doesn't necessarily improve the situation though, does it? And it shows the futility of the current, polarised system. We need to go back to the 1880s when the whips had less power, issues were debated properly to reach consensus, and the members could vote for what was agreed rather than along party lines.
Right! I get it, it's ok to be a criminal but it's a hanging offence to be a crackpot Do you mean Corbyn who is suspended from the Labour Party and has had the whip removed and Galloway who was expelled? I would have thought your objectivity would allow you to be more current in your examples. My dad always said that the Labour Party were a broad church and their strength came from the strong foundation that that provides. Miliband turned that on its head when he changed the voting system in 2014 and allowed Momentum to influence leadership votes. Thankfully that is another thing that Starmer has addressed but that appears to have gone under the radar of most casual observers.
Going back to the 1880's? Are you Jacob Rees Mogg in disguise The leader of the oppositions role is to scrutinise government actions, hold them to account and suggest alternative policies. Considering that Starmer is doing a great job
I don't believe I ever said there was anything wrong with being a crackpot, did I now. I just said that Labour leaders had to keep them under control. Yes, I do mean Corbyn, who is suspended from the Labour Party and has had the whip removed and Galloway who was expelled, because I was citing examples that Labour leaders had historically to keep in check. I mean if we're talking objectivity, we should be able to have a fairly tame discussion about aspects of the history of the Labour party over the last 40 years or so without anyone getting upset.
