Keir Starmer giving Johnson another tough time at PMQ’s

Baggins said:
Do you understand context? Sometimes you have to read/quote a whole report without picking out a specific quotation, because something taken out of context can be extremely misleading and dangerous. Corbyn was the victim of this a lot, given his somewhat pacifist and anti-nuclear views.

If any politicians lie then no, I am not happy with it.
Click to expand...
I do understand context, Starmer clearly said that guidance was in place into Martch, which is why he asked if the government should have done more sooner.

Boris *rse covering reply is that that guidance was from February, which would be fair enough. If it wasn't for the fact the guidance wasn't retracted until March. Ergo his retracting doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Therefore, whether knowingly or not, he lied to the house and definitely knowingly, he refuses to acknowledge it.
 
Alvez_48 said:
The most important thing that Starmer will do in the coming weeks will be to deal with the party members who actively undermined Corbyn.

The way he performs on that issue will be the yardstick.

Funny how anti semitism has disappeared as a labour problem now.
Click to expand...
I guess the reality is that it was never really a problem. It was simply a tactic to associate Corbyn's support of the palestinian people with a racist-prejudiced mindset for political gain. There is no evidence that the Labour Party is 'infested with anti-semitism', or in fact any anti-semite views within teh labour membership are wider than any other political party.
 
Boris ( the tories) weren’t scared of Corbyn at all, as they at best saw him as an irrelevance and at worst as an irritant, but just look how the demeanour has now changed.
 
BoroMart said:
I guess the reality is that it was never really a problem. It was simply a tactic to associate Corbyn's support of the palestinian people with a racist-prejudiced mindset for political gain. There is no evidence that the Labour Party is 'infested with anti-semitism', or in fact any anti-semite views within teh labour membership are wider than any other political party.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, course there wasn't an anti semitism problem under JC.

Which is more reason for Starmer to take action on those within the party who actively undermined him and frustrated the anti semitism response. If he doesn't that will tell me more about Starmer than asking pertinent questions at PMQs (just like Corbyn did).
 
Baggins said:
Starmer has undoubtedly made a good start, but like I have said he is not going far enough (both with the PMQs for example, but also with the Labour party problems). He has a very good opportunity here to do lasting damage to the Tories and also the Labour dissenters.
Click to expand...
I disagree with the not going far enough. People seem to want mad aggression in politics, hatred and quick results. Now is not the time for this in the slightest. We are undergoing a catastrophic crisis both in terms of human health and the economy. no is the time to be patient and slowly pick apart the failings of the government that are leading to deaths.

The next few months will be about showing that he can help guide the nation through this crisis, albeit just by holding the government to account, he then has a couple of years to heal the rifts within the labour party and prove he can lead it, then a couple more years to prove he can lead the country. Before the general election.

Although, I do like to think, as someone else on here has said. He's deliberately leading Johnson down a path to ensure that when any public enquiry happens the fallings of the current prime minister are well documented enough to ensure he has difficulty bluffing his way out of them. I do hope he and his shameful cabinet are hold to account for their actions.
 
Starmer seems to lack political intuition. People want to see the opposition supporting the government until we're past the crisis, after which they can go back to full on adversarial mode. Plus, all this nickpicking doesn't provide the soundbites that the media want. His first PMQ was about the 100k test target, which was of no real lasting importance. Yesterday he was on about the graph of 'deaths by nation' being 'retired' from the daily report, is if people can't figure out that it's almost meaningless.
He needs to be patient.
 
zorro_mfc said:
Boris ( the tories) weren’t scared of Corbyn at all, as they at best saw him as an irrelevance and at worst as an irritant, but just look how the demeanour has now changed.
Click to expand...
Corbyn played the same "cult of personality" argumentative, soundbite and bluster politics that BJ does. The difference being he really wasn't any good at it. Starmer appears to be using facts and figures and measured responses. This should be encouraged. Not just from Labour MPs but from all MP's. I'm sick to death of partizan, heart ruling head, combative politics.
 
He is supporting the government. He is also picking his battles. I think he is definitely holding back rather than being seen as haranguing the government when they need to focus on other things. It speaks volumes that tory supporting press are giving Johnson a bad angle on this and his response to Starmer. He's getting comments on record now, because he knows he can come back to them later when they are on record. Calling out the detail, disparity, inaccuracy etc is what is needed rather than just letting them get away with it, or going full on attack dog mode.
 
Anton_Berg said:
Starmer seems to lack political intuition. People want to see the opposition supporting the government until we're past the crisis, after which they can go back to full on adversarial mode. Plus, all this nickpicking doesn't provide the soundbites that the media want. His first PMQ was about the 100k test target, which was of no real lasting importance. Yesterday he was on about the graph of 'deaths by nation' being 'retired' from the daily report, is if people can't figure out that it's almost meaningless.
He needs to be patient.
Click to expand...
This is completely wrong he wasn’t doing that at all he was highlighting how the govt are editing the results they show and why after 13 weeks of using this graph as a bell weather is it suddenly omitted.

Ergo what was the difference in not showing it now when it was deem relevant before again it’s all part of his what is sage strategy and what/who decides what is ok to see and what isn’t.
 
Anton_Berg said:
Starmer seems to lack political intuition. People want to see the opposition supporting the government until we're past the crisis, after which they can go back to full on adversarial mode. Plus, all this nickpicking doesn't provide the soundbites that the media want. His first PMQ was about the 100k test target, which was of no real lasting importance. Yesterday he was on about the graph of 'deaths by nation' being 'retired' from the daily report, is if people can't figure out that it's almost meaningless.
He needs to be patient.
Click to expand...
People can't figure out these things though. People do seem particularly blind to what happening in this country at the moment. It's important that he points out that a graph was used for 7 weeks to show that, compared to some of our European counterparts we weren't doing to badly. this graph was then removed as soon as it showed the opposite. It's important people bring the government up on such manipulation of the data.
 
TheFair86 said:
He is supporting the government. He is also picking his battles. I think he is definitely holding back rather than being seen as haranguing the government when they need to focus on other things. It speaks volumes that tory supporting press are giving Johnson a bad angle on this and his response to Starmer. He's getting comments on record now, because he knows he can come back to them later when they are on record. Calling out the detail, disparity, inaccuracy etc is what is needed rather than just letting them get away with it, or going full on attack dog mode.
Click to expand...
Very well put
 
FatCat said:
they are two different things I agree that Starmer got the better of Boris and that Boris didn’t have the answers so lied. Point I was making is that he can only go so far scoring points in PMQs, he should concentrate on defining his policies and what his party stands for - if people don’t know what he represents then they won’t vote for him ( regardless of how many arguments he wins at PMQs)
Click to expand...
I don't think he's "points scoring" though. Or at least I hope not. It doesn't seem to be his style. He's simply trying to hold the government to account for their failings. It's not his fault that they are still trying to bluster their way out of this. Rather than holding their hands up.
 
Btw if this graph re appears now then that is a Pyrrhic victory to starmer as he will have forced the govts hand and the longer this graph is omitted the more question to be asked.

It’s a really clever strategy as it’s targeting the credibility of the govt without criticising its actions directly.
 
I feel that the only way that a government changes in this country is by a long process of people starting to see that the ruling party are not in control of things.

My example is Blair. How many elections did he win after the invasion of Iraq. It wasn't just an event that seems seismic looking back on it that caused labour to lose. Nor was it Conservatives setting out clear policies that won them it.

For example Osbourne's approach to bank regulation that he built up for the first few years he was shadow chancellor was all about the fact that our banks were over regulated and we needed to have a free market approach to them.

It takes a lot for a government to change and Starmer has four and a half years in which he will have to keep highlighting Boris's performance at every opportunity, until there is a general feeling that he is not capable of running the country.

It will all depend how Europe works out for Johnson, as if that goes well, then people will get the feeling that he has achieved what he set out to do. Coronovirus will be an issue that nobody could have forseen / coped with. If EU exit goes badly then there will be a consensus starting to form that everything Johnson touches turns bad.

There will not be a general election for four years, even if Johnson loses his job as PM. See Thatcher, Blair, Cameron and May for examples of prime minister losing his party but no general election.
 
junos_boots said:
There will not be a general election for four years, even if Johnson loses his job as PM. See Thatcher, Blair, Cameron and May for examples of prime minister losing his party but no general election.
Click to expand...

You forgot Gordon Brown. Easy to do I guess, but unfortunately not for many.
 
uncle_rico said:
He wasn't voted in in one though, which your post was about. Unlike the others, the damage he caused seems to be easily forgotten.
Click to expand...
I'd forgotten it. Perhaps because he did a good job.

I'll never forget the damage done by this government though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top