Keir Starmer - FoM now a red-line

I have to admit I'm surprised at Starmer saying what he has yesterday about abolishing the House of Lords. Doesn't fit my expectations of him at all. Obviously I don't believe he'd actually go through with it, but even saying it at this point is just very interesting and a bit confounding.

news.sky.com

Sir Keir Starmer pledges to abolish House of Lords in first term as prime minister

Tory peer Lord Norton has urged caution over "Big Bang reform" to parliament's second chamber after suggestions it should be replaced with elected representatives.
news.sky.com news.sky.com

There was rumours last week about Starmer and Gordon Brown arguing over this. I wonder if Brown's threatened him with something. No idea what though. :unsure:
 
Last edited:
SuperStu said:
I have to admit I'm surprised at Starmer saying what he has yesterday about abolishing the House of Lords. Doesn't fit my expectations of him at all. Obviously I don't believe he'd actually go through with it, but even saying it at this point is just very interesting and a bit confounding.

news.sky.com

Sir Keir Starmer pledges to abolish House of Lords in first term as prime minister

Tory peer Lord Norton has urged caution over "Big Bang reform" to parliament's second chamber after suggestions it should be replaced with elected representatives.
news.sky.com news.sky.com

There was rumours last week about Starmer and Gordon Brown arguing over this. I wonder if Brown's threatened him with something. No idea what though. :unsure:
Click to expand...
I think it may have been their aides who had a disagreement.

My view, Gordon Brown is a respected political heavyweight (a view not shared by everyone I agree) and this report took two years to compile. Yes, the report should go out to consultation however that much time and effort should not go to waste through non-implementation. It could form the basis of Labour's GE manifesto.

On a lighter note, rumour has it that the Shadow Cabinet had sight of a draft last week. They remarked how long the report is but were assured it would be edited down. The report was actually published 15 pages longer 🤣
 
Last edited:
exiledinboro said:
As if this guy would ever offer full PR. It’s not in his nature
Click to expand...
Speculation. Has he commented on PR, ever?
Another stick to beat him with.

exiledinboro said:
And his reforming consultation on the lords has been promised before, by Brown and Blair. You couldn’t make it up 🤩
Click to expand...
But he's never promised it before and is currently not in office. Brown and Blair were.
Another stick to beat him with.

exiledinboro said:
And back to the central point why would I trust that he wouldn’t change his mind once elected and scrap any reform? I’d be mad to trust him
Click to expand...
Speculation. He's never promised it before ergo he's never changed his mind on it.
Another stick to beat him with.
 
BoroFur said:
I wouldn't bother, people won't read beyond the headlines because others didn't do the same when Corbyn was leader.
Click to expand...
So explain why they should then.

Why do I have to compromise when you wouldn't?

Why do I have to read behind the headlines when you wouldn't?


(Where "l" and "you" mean Corbyn cultists vs Starmer fanboys).
 
He said he’s open to tagging asylum seekers and refugees in particular cases(what constitutes ‘particular cases’, he didn’t say). But we know what he means when he says this.

What he is doing is taking the party to the right to try to appeal to Tories, floating voters and the right-wing gutter press. But he’s alienating large swathes of members, voters, campaigners and activists.

Some people may be comfortable with him doing that because they think that’s the only way he can win, but I’m definitely not comfortable with it. This will cause damage in the longer term IMO, because it further erodes trust in politicians.

He may also be in for a shock further down the line when he realises that everything he says about immigrants, crime, refugees, Israel, the House of Lords, etc, is weaponised by the very people he’s currently trying to curry favour with.

By the way, my feelings on Starmer are nothing to do with Jeremy Corbyn. I’m angry and disappointed with what happened to him but he’s been gone for years. I listen to what Starmer says and how he behaves and try to judge him based on that. And at the moment, I don’t have much faith in Starmer at all TBH. A politician who lies is a liar regardless of the colour of the rosette they’re wearing.
 
Scrote said:
Why do I have to compromise when you wouldn't?
Click to expand...
But I did compromise in 2017 and 2019 when some of his values didn't align with my own.

Let's take it a step further though. I'm sure you will find that quite a number of people compromised on the 2nd referendum position in 2019 and pushed it on the doorsteps. The same people now support Keir Starmer. What would you say to them?
 
MolteniArcore said:
In your opinion...
Click to expand...
It isn’t just my opinion. Look around online and in the media and you’ll find all sorts of opinions on what Starmer has said, why he’s said it and some of the possible ramifications.
Laughing said:
That was an example of the disingenuous context I referred to.
Click to expand...
It isn’t disingenuous to say Keir Starmer has said he is open to tagging asylum seekers and refugees in particular(unspecified) cases.

But if you do think I’m being disingenuous, that’s fine. But what would say about Starmer breaking every pledge he stood on in the leadership election? Surely you couldn’t or wouldn’t vote for someone who was as disingenuous or dishonest as that? Or should we just be expected to suck it up in the name of some unexplained ‘greater good’ that will come should he become Prime Minister.

Maybe instead of constantly giving Starmer the free pass of ‘he has to say that because of this, but he’ll do something else when he wins,’ we should be asking where this belief actually comes from. Because if we’re going off what he’s said and how he’s behaved, he’s just another dishonest politician who doesn’t deserve anyone’s vote.
 
BoroFur said:
But I did compromise in 2017 and 2019 when some of his values didn't align with my own.

Let's take it a step further though. I'm sure you will find that quite a number of people compromised on the 2nd referendum position in 2019 and pushed it on the doorsteps. The same people now support Keir Starmer. What would you say to them?
Click to expand...
I asked earlier in the thread which parts of the 2017 and 2019 manifestos you disagreed with (and therefore compromised on). I'll expand that to include Corbyn's values. What values do you disagree with and what values do you hold instead which force a compromise?

As to what I'd say to the people compromising on the doorstep, again, I'd need to know what they were compromising on. So far you've been adamant that no one understood the position so how could they have come to any compromise?

Our are you saying people on the doorstop were telling voters to just back Corbyn and hope for the best?

Presumably what they'll also have to do for Starmer given the amount of contradiction in his politics at the moment...
 
Scrote said:
I asked earlier in the thread which parts of the 2017 and 2019 manifestos you disagreed with (and therefore compromised on). I'll expand that to include Corbyn's values. What values do you disagree with and what values do you hold instead which force a compromise?

As to what I'd say to the people compromising on the doorstep, again, I'd need to know what they were compromising on. So far you've been adamant that no one understood the position so how could they have come to any compromise?

Our are you saying people on the doorstop were telling voters to just back Corbyn and hope for the best?

Presumably what they'll also have to do for Starmer given the amount of contradiction in his politics at the moment...
Click to expand...
You see this is why it's utterly pointless debating with you. I told you that I compromised, that should be enough for you but clearly not. If I told you, you'd just get into a discussion why I compromised and fly off in a whole new direction.

I asked you what you would say now to someone who believed in and pushed Corbyn's 2nd referendum gimmick on the doorsteps but is now fully behind Starmer. You didn't answer. In fact you answered with a question.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
It isn’t just my opinion. Look around online and in the media and you’ll find all sorts of opinions on what Starmer has said, why he’s said it and some of the possible ramifications.

It isn’t disingenuous to say Keir Starmer has said he is open to tagging asylum seekers and refugees in particular(unspecified) cases.

But if you do think I’m being disingenuous, that’s fine. But what would say about Starmer breaking every pledge he stood on in the leadership election? Surely you couldn’t or wouldn’t vote for someone who was as disingenuous or dishonest as that? Or should we just be expected to suck it up in the name of some unexplained ‘greater good’ that will come should he become Prime Minister.

Maybe instead of constantly giving Starmer the free pass of ‘he has to say that because of this, but he’ll do something else when he wins,’ we should be asking where this belief actually comes from. Because if we’re going off what he’s said and how he’s behaved, he’s just another dishonest politician who doesn’t deserve anyone’s vote.
Click to expand...
Apologies viv I misread your comment and missed the bit about open to under certain circumstances when you quoted starmer on tagging migrants
 
BoroFur said:
You see this is why it's utterly pointless debating with you. I told you that I compromised, that should be enough for you but clearly not. If I told you, you'd just get into a discussion why I compromised and fly off in a whole new direction.

I asked you what you would say now to someone who believed in and pushed Corbyn's 2nd referendum gimmick on the doorsteps but is now fully behind Starmer. You didn't answer. In fact you answered with a question.
Click to expand...
How hard can it be to give examples of things you compromised on?

Why worry about what I might do with that information? We might as well shut the forum down if we're going stop posting anything that might be questioned.

You're now presenting the referendum position as a de facto gimmick despite claiming not to know what it actually was. Make your mind up.

I can't answer your question about people on the doorstep for the reason stated. I didn't ignore the question as you keep doing. I asked for clarity. Which you've failed to provide. Again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top