Q. What does the Labour Party stand for?

I believe Starmer is publishing such a document this summer. I am not so bothered that he hasn't publicly announced where Labour stand on policy thus far, it would be pointless in a pandemic and policy could quite easily change given the circumstances.

What does concern me is his use of market research and focus groups. Why not go back to when you first entered politics. Why did you do that, what changes did you want to see. There is the framework for your manifesto. Trying to please the electorate by bending to what you think will get you in to power is playing the tory game and will loose you core support.

I don't even care if those core principals don't fully align with my beliefs, is it closer to what I believe than the tory offerring?

Starmer has to do better in the next 12 months, that seems clear to me at least. However I can see the reason for the delay.

I do get the feeling a lot of the handling of party members criticising Israel, for example, is Starmer trying to eliminate an area that the tories and press used to condemn Labour in the past. I think he is wrong, and pandering to a, largely, tory press will not work.

He is clearly an intelligent bloke. His career would suggest he is a supporter of equality. Those are a good base to start from. I would hope to see a clearer vision of where he is taking the party in the coming 12 months so we can all begin to make our minds up about where the party sits in our vision of this country.

One final thing, there has been some trip posted about Starmer on this board, his sacking or Raynor for one. He promoted her for crying out loud. This kind of reaction just tells me that some people have amde their minds up and it doesn't matter what he does from here on.
 
Wiseman_Vaughn said:
Should they really have to write it down?
Click to expand...
I don't know, why not would be my response. As I said in my post I don't agree with how Labour policy seems to be developed. It probably should be from your inherent belief system. If the approach works I don't see a problem with it. Do you?
 
Laughing said:
I don't know, why not would be my response. As I said in my post I don't agree with how Labour policy seems to be developed. It probably should be from your inherent belief system. If the approach works I don't see a problem with it. Do you?
Click to expand...
I'm not really that bothered to be honest. I suppose if it is about winning back the hearts of the working class in the north, fair enough, but ist's going to take more than a document to do that. I just don't think that Starmer appeals to Northern Working man.
 
Wiseman_Vaughn said:
I'm not really that bothered to be honest. I suppose if it is about winning back the hearts of the working class in the north, fair enough, but ist's going to take more than a document to do that. I just don't think that Starmer appeals to Northern Working man.
Click to expand...
And Johnson does?
 
asredastheycome said:
Apparently, a lot I have spoken to love him and don't care he is a lying corrupt piece of :poop:
Click to expand...
That's the sad thing , he does, the difference between the two is johnson is a morally bankrupt habitual liar, racist and misogynist.
Is that the appeal? Do these people share the same traits or admire and value them?
 
Another symptom of a broken system to me. We haven't had a properly functioning opposition for years. To my mind we have a corrupt, lying, incompetent government and across from them a wishy washy, indecisivie opposition party that is hiding from the big issues. The only differentiator is that at the very least the opposition does appear to be honest and decent.

I have said this before but there are, essentially, three parts to a functioning democracy. Firstly, you need a strong opposition that will hold the government to account. Secondly, you need an impartial media. Finally, an indepdendent judiciary with the power to ensure that those in power use that power within the law. We are clinging on to the latter in the face of powers of judicial review being stripped away and the judiciary coming under attack from the partisan media. We simply don't have the first two. As I said before: a deep, deep crisis.
 
Adi_Dem said:
Another symptom of a broken system to me. We haven't had a properly functioning opposition for years. To my mind we have a corrupt, lying, incompetent government and across from them a wishy washy, indecisivie opposition party that is hiding from the big issues. The only differentiator is that at the very least the opposition does appear to be honest and decent.

I have said this before but there are, essentially, three parts to a functioning democracy. Firstly, you need a strong opposition that will hold the government to account. Secondly, you need an impartial media. Finally, an indepdendent judiciary with the power to ensure that those in power use that power within the law. We are clinging on to the latter in the face of powers of judicial review being stripped away and the judiciary coming under attack from the partisan media. We simply don't have the first two. As I said before: a deep, deep crisis.
Click to expand...
Unless it's a minority government then this 'holding the government to account' isn't possible. It has never been possible. It's only the government party that can hold government to account.
 
bear66 said:
Unless it's a minority government then this 'holding the government to account' isn't possible. It has never been possible. It's only the government party that can hold government to account.
Click to expand...
That's very true Bear, a slim majority can be effective ifor opposition also. An 80 seat majority makes effective opposition impossible, whatever you think of Starmer.
 
bear66 said:
Unless it's a minority government then this 'holding the government to account' isn't possible. It has never been possible. It's only the government party that can hold government to account.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. And so the pathway to a functioning opposition (which is why I used that term) is to replace FPTP with PR. It is the only way to achieve that sim and prevent the power grab that has always been going on but which has accelerated under these charlatans.
 
Adi_Dem said:
I completely agree. And so the pathway to a functioning opposition (which is why I used that term) is to replace FPTP with PR. It is the only way to achieve that sim and prevent the power grab that has always been going on but which has accelerated under these charlatans.
Click to expand...
...and the closest we ever got to PR, Labour opposed it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top