Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)
Discussion
The problem is simply this
Starmer has told us nothing, he has given us zero details other than
“My Labour Government will…(insert whatever vague promise to the future you like) ..”
If he does have a position on something it’s almost guaranteed he will change it 30 minutes later
What was really telling was the interview on local TV about the refugee barge when he point blank ignored the (repeated) question and didn’t answer what was a simple one to give
A) yes we’ll keep the barge
B) no we will get rid of the barge
c) I’m happy/not happy about it and we will review refugee accommodation as soon as we are in power and in possession of the full facts
It’s not hard it really isn’t
It’s simply that no one knows what he stands for
He can, as in the picture above, have a new haircut, designer glasses and trendy clothes but he still comes across as slippery as a snake
It does not inspire any confidence at all that he is the right man for the job
Starmer has told us nothing, he has given us zero details other than
“My Labour Government will…(insert whatever vague promise to the future you like) ..”
If he does have a position on something it’s almost guaranteed he will change it 30 minutes later
What was really telling was the interview on local TV about the refugee barge when he point blank ignored the (repeated) question and didn’t answer what was a simple one to give
A) yes we’ll keep the barge
B) no we will get rid of the barge
c) I’m happy/not happy about it and we will review refugee accommodation as soon as we are in power and in possession of the full facts
It’s not hard it really isn’t
It’s simply that no one knows what he stands for
He can, as in the picture above, have a new haircut, designer glasses and trendy clothes but he still comes across as slippery as a snake
It does not inspire any confidence at all that he is the right man for the job
I always go back to the title of the thread. He can and has.
The conservative party has been transformed. It's gone from being a viable political party to a desperate mix of dispirited folk.
No one believes now the Conservative Party can win. Least of all the Conservative Party
They are not even bothering in some constituencies.
It's over finished
The conservative party has been transformed. It's gone from being a viable political party to a desperate mix of dispirited folk.
No one believes now the Conservative Party can win. Least of all the Conservative Party
They are not even bothering in some constituencies.
It's over finished
Earthdweller said:
The problem is simply this
Starmer has told us nothing, he has given us zero details other than
“My Labour Government will…(insert whatever vague promise to the future you like) ..”
If he does have a position on something it’s almost guaranteed he will change it 30 minutes later
What was really telling was the interview on local TV about the refugee barge when he point blank ignored the (repeated) question and didn’t answer what was a simple one to give
A) yes we’ll keep the barge
B) no we will get rid of the barge
c) I’m happy/not happy about it and we will review refugee accommodation as soon as we are in power and in possession of the full facts
It’s not hard it really isn’t
It’s simply that no one knows what he stands for
He can, as in the picture above, have a new haircut, designer glasses and trendy clothes but he still comes across as slippery as a snake
It does not inspire any confidence at all that he is the right man for the job
This one (can’t be another one,surely Starmer has told us nothing, he has given us zero details other than
“My Labour Government will…(insert whatever vague promise to the future you like) ..”
If he does have a position on something it’s almost guaranteed he will change it 30 minutes later
What was really telling was the interview on local TV about the refugee barge when he point blank ignored the (repeated) question and didn’t answer what was a simple one to give
A) yes we’ll keep the barge
B) no we will get rid of the barge
c) I’m happy/not happy about it and we will review refugee accommodation as soon as we are in power and in possession of the full facts
It’s not hard it really isn’t
It’s simply that no one knows what he stands for
He can, as in the picture above, have a new haircut, designer glasses and trendy clothes but he still comes across as slippery as a snake
It does not inspire any confidence at all that he is the right man for the job
)https://x.com/addicted2newz/status/180380795244631...
don'tbesilly said:
It's the same thing with his response to prison overcrowding. He says "build more prisons" which will increase capacity but he won't say what he'll do in the months and years before construction is finished.Loving the latest wheeze from Labour on making rental bidding wars illegal. The bright idea is that if a landlord advertises a property for let's say a rental price of £1500 per month they cannot accept any offer above that.
Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
Vanden Saab said:
Loving the latest wheeze from Labour on making rental bidding wars illegal. The bright idea is that if a landlord advertises a property for let's say a rental price of £1500 per month they cannot accept any offer above that.
Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
I know. It's terrible that the landlords will have to reduce their prices.Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
Derek Smith said:
Vanden Saab said:
Loving the latest wheeze from Labour on making rental bidding wars illegal. The bright idea is that if a landlord advertises a property for let's say a rental price of £1500 per month they cannot accept any offer above that.
Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
I know. It's terrible that the landlords will have to reduce their prices.Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
Derek Smith said:
Vanden Saab said:
Loving the latest wheeze from Labour on making rental bidding wars illegal. The bright idea is that if a landlord advertises a property for let's say a rental price of £1500 per month they cannot accept any offer above that.
Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
I know. It's terrible that the landlords will have to reduce their prices.Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
Wombat3 said:
He's too smart to have said much that would enable you to label him a "pathalogical liar" but he is selling Snake Oil.
His declarations about income tax & NI etc are just a complete and obvious mugging-off. Its quite obvious that what hes not saying is far more important than what he is saying.
His constant flip-flopping also means I see little reason to believe much of anything he says and I also think there are clear signs of the idealogical left at work both with him and his party.
His declaration that he would never use private healthcare was really quite stark and unequivocal in the dogmatic nature of his thinking. His policy re VAT on private school fees is nothing but ill thought through dogma driven & idealogical nonsense which will have clear and obvious negative side effects.
I think this is likely to be one of the most left wing governments we have had in the UK for generations. I also think they will do significant damage precisely because of the dogmatic nature of their thinking. Such damage is usually very, very long lasting.
The sad thing is that for all that, as always, it will be the least well off who will actually suffer the most in the long run.
Overall, I think he is likely to be very bad news indeed.
What's your problem with the statement that he will not increase VAT nor income tax? I don't know what mugging off is, but that's a clear statement. His declarations about income tax & NI etc are just a complete and obvious mugging-off. Its quite obvious that what hes not saying is far more important than what he is saying.
His constant flip-flopping also means I see little reason to believe much of anything he says and I also think there are clear signs of the idealogical left at work both with him and his party.
His declaration that he would never use private healthcare was really quite stark and unequivocal in the dogmatic nature of his thinking. His policy re VAT on private school fees is nothing but ill thought through dogma driven & idealogical nonsense which will have clear and obvious negative side effects.
I think this is likely to be one of the most left wing governments we have had in the UK for generations. I also think they will do significant damage precisely because of the dogmatic nature of their thinking. Such damage is usually very, very long lasting.
The sad thing is that for all that, as always, it will be the least well off who will actually suffer the most in the long run.
Overall, I think he is likely to be very bad news indeed.
I also fail to see the connect with him stating he will not use private health care and removing tax concessions from private school fees. I'm not sure what the clear and obvious negatives are, but most research, from right and left outlets, seems to suggest that most parents will continue to pay the fees. The furore on here especially, but also generally, when a shadow labour minister sent her kids to private school seems to indicate that he has beliefs.
I feel that VAT on a service is reasonable and not ideological nonsense. There are lots of reasons why. Perhaps they are the same as his.
anonymoususer said:
I always go back to the title of the thread. He can and has.
The conservative party has been transformed. It's gone from being a viable political party to a desperate mix of dispirited folk.
No one believes now the Conservative Party can win. Least of all the Conservative Party
They are not even bothering in some constituencies.
It's over finished
It’s fabulous, isn’t it. Pass the fizz! The conservative party has been transformed. It's gone from being a viable political party to a desperate mix of dispirited folk.
No one believes now the Conservative Party can win. Least of all the Conservative Party
They are not even bothering in some constituencies.
It's over finished
Derek Smith said:
What's your problem with the statement that he will not increase VAT nor income tax? I don't know what mugging off is, but that's a clear statement.
I also fail to see the connect with him stating he will not use private health care and removing tax concessions from private school fees. I'm not sure what the clear and obvious negatives are, but most research, from right and left outlets, seems to suggest that most parents will continue to pay the fees. The furore on here especially, but also generally, when a shadow labour minister sent her kids to private school seems to indicate that he has beliefs.
I feel that VAT on a service is reasonable and not ideological nonsense. There are lots of reasons why. Perhaps they are the same as his.
1) He is changing VAT - on private school fees I also fail to see the connect with him stating he will not use private health care and removing tax concessions from private school fees. I'm not sure what the clear and obvious negatives are, but most research, from right and left outlets, seems to suggest that most parents will continue to pay the fees. The furore on here especially, but also generally, when a shadow labour minister sent her kids to private school seems to indicate that he has beliefs.
I feel that VAT on a service is reasonable and not ideological nonsense. There are lots of reasons why. Perhaps they are the same as his.
2) The big problem with all these things he is not going to touch is, what is he going to touch to pay for everything he will fix?
VAT on private school fees is due to pay for rather a lot, it seems
What research is there that shows parents will suck up an extra 20% on fees? It's guesswork. It's "safe" guesswork as a minority of people send their kids to them, so if they all give him the V, it doesn't matter one jot. At the moment. But my guesswork is that it will have plenty of unintended, but not unforeseeable, consequences. And the people who will suffer most will be the ones Starmer is aiming to get frothiest about it.
Vanden Saab said:
Loving the latest wheeze from Labour on making rental bidding wars illegal. The bright idea is that if a landlord advertises a property for let's say a rental price of £1500 per month they cannot accept any offer above that.
Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
Especially since Dutch auctions lead to higher end prices.Now, even the most challenged amongst us can see what will happen. Any landlord with a brain will just put his property up for £2000ono after all if he does not get offered that he can always take a lower price. End result is a large jump in rental prices.
With this kind of thinking it is going to be a long 5 years.
anonymoususer said:
I always go back to the title of the thread. He can and has.
Not this again! Johnson and Truss did the work, with icing on the cake from Sunak;s gaffes. Starmer breathed air as it happened.If you missed the Lord Ashcfoft and Guardian links, Starmer has failed to win hearts and minds, voters tend to prefer Tory policy but dislike the Tories more, and won't vote for them due to the people. Self-inflicted.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I think that's fair.
Starmer still seems awkward sometimes i.e. you'd have thought after a week he'd have a coherent answer for the inevitable questions about his support for Corbyn but he still made himself look daft and unprepared for being asked.
But I do think when you put them both in front of the public, as in normal people not their advisors and party members pretending to be the public, Starmer has grown on me and simply seems to "get it" more than Sunak does.
True, but at the same time it's another of these absurd purity tests; every cabinet minister and few aspiring ones will have pledged true fealty to no less than 3 prime ministers in as many years, yet the question isn't directed to them, especially Sunak himself. There isn't a pleasing answer to it, it's a feature of our political system that the forelock is tugged to whoever the party leader is at the time and those who do not do not get sweeties, so Starmer, particularly being a novice MP, tugged the forelock. Whether breaking that particular political 4th wall would harm Labour's or his prospects is clearly not something he wants to test, so we get waffle.Starmer still seems awkward sometimes i.e. you'd have thought after a week he'd have a coherent answer for the inevitable questions about his support for Corbyn but he still made himself look daft and unprepared for being asked.
But I do think when you put them both in front of the public, as in normal people not their advisors and party members pretending to be the public, Starmer has grown on me and simply seems to "get it" more than Sunak does.
philv said:
Will we see the land value tax?
I hope there is, it might go some way to unwinding the consequences of the absurd follies indulged by govt for the last 40 years.Puzzles said:
I really wouldn’t want to be a landlord right now.
Anyone sensible bailed out of it years ago; did you miss George Osborne making the pips squeak?Edited by hidetheelephants on Saturday 22 June 20:23
hidetheelephants said:
True, but at the same time it's another of these absurd purity tests; every cabinet minister and few aspiring ones will have pledged true fealty to no less than 3 prime ministers in as many years, yet the question isn't directed to them, especially Sunak himself. There isn't a pleasing answer to it, it's a feature of our political system that the forelock is tugged to whoever the party leader is at the time and those who do not do not get sweeties, so Starmer, particularly being a novice MP, tugged the forelock. Whether breaking that particular political 4th wall would harm Labour's or his prospects is clearly not something he wants to test, so we get waffle.
The best answer he can give is that he resigned in 2016, saw that the members supported Corbyn so joined the cabinet to serve the party and country and influence the party in the right direction even if he personally thought the leader was not the best man for the job.Instead he does his usual thing of giving a no comment interview and as a result looks more shifty than he needs to.
He will get a big enough majority to be able to afford to lose a few seats by being straight with the public and the MPs he would miss out on won't be the best anyway.
https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/articl...
Great article about Starmer and Labour's flip flopping from a Labour member.
Great article about Starmer and Labour's flip flopping from a Labour member.
Matthew Syed said:
I worry that a future Labour government will genuflect before any campaign with sufficient momentum. I mean, look at the sheer scale of Starmer’s flip-flopping, not just on trans issues but the nationalisation of trains, renewable energy, tuition fees, Diane Abbott and, just last week, the definition of “working people”. What is his true position, his moral centre of gravity?
Murph7355 said:
1) He is changing VAT - on private school fees
2) The big problem with all these things he is not going to touch is, what is he going to touch to pay for everything he will fix?
VAT on private school fees is due to pay for rather a lot, it seems
What research is there that shows parents will suck up an extra 20% on fees? It's guesswork. It's "safe" guesswork as a minority of people send their kids to them, so if they all give him the V, it doesn't matter one jot. At the moment. But my guesswork is that it will have plenty of unintended, but not unforeseeable, consequences. And the people who will suffer most will be the ones Starmer is aiming to get frothiest about it.
1/ VAT remains the same at 20%.2) The big problem with all these things he is not going to touch is, what is he going to touch to pay for everything he will fix?
VAT on private school fees is due to pay for rather a lot, it seems
What research is there that shows parents will suck up an extra 20% on fees? It's guesswork. It's "safe" guesswork as a minority of people send their kids to them, so if they all give him the V, it doesn't matter one jot. At the moment. But my guesswork is that it will have plenty of unintended, but not unforeseeable, consequences. And the people who will suffer most will be the ones Starmer is aiming to get frothiest about it.
2/ Not VAT and, NI and tax rates.
The vast majority of parents who send their kids to private school have stated they will continue to do so. It is also the norm. Tax rises on cigarettes stopped very few smoking. The same goes, but more so, for alcohol. It is probable they will pay up. The reasons for sending children to private schools will remain.
What are these unintended but not unforeseeable, and apparently difficult to specify, circumstances?
The exemption of a service, or product, from VAT has to be justified. What justification can there be for what is an expensive item, out of reach for most of the population and enjoyed by, as you suggest, a 'minority'? A private school near me charges £17,000+ per term for boarders. That, of course, is the base charge. There are a number of oncosts. That puts it out of reach of the majority of those who have kids. Mind you, I expect some of the fee will be 'absorbed', in the same way the cuts were absorbed by a number of public services. Full details for one particular one available on request.
The financial state of the country is such that sacrifices will have to be made by many. Fewer visits to food banks is not really an option that will bring much in. The lower middle has been squeezed. Where's the money for rebuilding coming from? How about luxury goods, particularly those so far exempt from VAT?
Mr Penguin said:
https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/articl...
Great article about Starmer and Labour's flip flopping from a Labour member.
What flipflopping has he done on rail nationalisation? It's all but nationalised anyway. Perish the thought a government might be moved by public pressure, like the tories were over the post office, the blood scandal, etc. Great article about Starmer and Labour's flip flopping from a Labour member.
Matthew Syed said:
I worry that a future Labour government will genuflect before any campaign with sufficient momentum. I mean, look at the sheer scale of Starmer’s flip-flopping, not just on trans issues but the nationalisation of trains, renewable energy, tuition fees, Diane Abbott and, just last week, the definition of “working people”. What is his true position, his moral centre of gravity?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff