Sir Keir Starmer
- Thread starter Chris_Boro
- Start date
Jonny Ingbar
Well-known member
It really is nonsense. I don't want to get into a d*ck measuring contest and I respect your experience, but suggesting that KS was solely responsible is highly simplistic and plainly wrong. I'm not saying he didn't help to some small degree (as many influential people did), but there have been many differing contributory factors.
BoroMart
Well-known member
Come on that's a little facetious, we have more than a semblance of what Starmer's labour party will be about. The labour party do not get a bunch of nameless suits in hidden rooms deciding policy like the Tories(decided by the few, for the benefit of ...?). Labour policy is largely voted for by policy commissions, that are made up of representatives from around various industries, in an open and transparent process. There will be a move to the centre from current policy, of course, but it won't suddenly become Tory-Lite and it certainly won't stay as left as the last set of policies.
Now of course how these policies will be finally worded, adopted and communicated will be influenced by Starmer and his shadow cabinet, and that is where the man's moral's, ethics and culture will come into play. Remember as an ex-human rights lawyer, it will certainly be focussed on bringing value and protection to people, over corporations...the antithesis of Tory ethics.
Last edited:
Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret
Well-known member
I'm not at all saying it was solely down to kier Starmer. It is down to the internet showing the prevalence of this type of behaviour and the Jimmy Savile case.
I am saying it is ridiculous to attack Starmer for ignoring child abuse, as he was DPP when the country was reacting to these events, and presided over a sea change in the way these cases are dealt with.
BoroMart
Well-known member
I don't think sheriff is claiming sole glory for Kier, however in his role he set policy and strategic aims, and that had a huge impact, that is unquestionable. It would be a bizarre stance to claim he didn't have huge part in the improvements. Like any organisational transformation, you need the executive to buy into and lead the necessary changes. Starmer clearly did that, he was ethically opposed to the old policies, he enabled that change.
BoroMart
Well-known member
I guess that shows what a good job the right wing press did. We didn't 'send EU money to the EU' we bought access to a single market. We didn't 'take back control', we always had it, and Turkey still isn't any closer today to being in the EU than it was at the referendum or indeed in 1990ish when it first applied.
swordtrombonefish
Well-known member
Jonny Ingbar
Well-known member
As someone who was there before, during and after the changes cited his role is important, but hugely overstated.
"Yet again today he is destroying Johnson."
Really? Think Boris will be pleased with PMQs this week. You can see already how the last two weeks have set an expectation that might end up going against Starmer sometimes. Any small slip up is going to get sarcastic comments along the lines of "great and forensic mind".
Really? Think Boris will be pleased with PMQs this week. You can see already how the last two weeks have set an expectation that might end up going against Starmer sometimes. Any small slip up is going to get sarcastic comments along the lines of "great and forensic mind".
FabioPorkpie
Well-known member
Rees Mogg is doing his best to get the bully boy cheerleaders back behind Boris to shout and whoop at his every word, to try and give the (false) impression that he’s holding his own. Surely only absolute dumb asses get taken in by that type of guff?
Anyway, fans of Boris and this current government aren’t generally the type to watch PMQ’s. Or the news. Or anything factual or informative in any way shape or form, to be fair. They don’t need to when they’ve got the Mail and Express to sum it all up in a few words for them.
Randy
Well-known member
Really? Crikey they are rattled.
Paterson
Well-known member
I watched that today and the difference from last week was that Johnson was more aggressive. He still waffled and barely answered a question though. Interesting to see if he can back up his data on care home tests and also whether his June 1st track and trace operation works out. Even if it doesn't though, he will just claim it did.
Jedi boro
Well-known member
Yep
Coronavirus: Rees-Mogg sticks by plan to bring MPs back
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52682923
Coronavirus: Rees-Mogg sticks by plan to bring MPs back
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52682923
BoroMart
Well-known member
The whole method of how we run the house of commons needs to be readdressed. It's archaic and embarrassing. Most modern democracies don't have this braying and whooping nonsense.
Lefty
Well-known member
I guess they are thinking ahead. What they care about is themselves, power, their Party, their donors, then their voters. In that order. The country doesn't enter into it, nor do the poor or disabled or minorities except when it begins to have an impact on their voters and consequently their grip on power. Then they will do just enough.
So they have 5 years. Johnson, they will ditch about a year before the next election. The problem will be if he is so damaged by then that the rest are so far tainted. It happened with Thatcher, but they had the relatively decent and inoffensive John Major to call on back then who the average person could tolerate and give a chance to. It worked while there was Kinnock as opposition leader who for some reason just wasn't really likeable or charismatic enough. Major wasn't enough though and from probably 1996 until December 2019 they had never really had a firm grip on power again. They will be wary of this happening again. Despite the current majority the future of the party is precarious. Covid, Brexit, their failing of the NHS, this is all still to play out over the next few years.
mitch_at_merseyside
Well-known member
Wouldn't it be for the speaker to decide whether members can return?
If people are being told to work at home if you can, then I can't understand why MPs would be allowed to come back. I would get it if bringing MPs back was for voting, but actually sitting in the HOC with no social distancing, it simply wouldn't work?
I hope they don't come back because it is funny seeing Johnson struggling, even Hancock was told off by the speaker for gobbing off when Starmer was making his points.
If people are being told to work at home if you can, then I can't understand why MPs would be allowed to come back. I would get it if bringing MPs back was for voting, but actually sitting in the HOC with no social distancing, it simply wouldn't work?
I hope they don't come back because it is funny seeing Johnson struggling, even Hancock was told off by the speaker for gobbing off when Starmer was making his points.
Muttley
Well-known member
Other than by tweaking (falsifying) the number of tests, has he managed to fulfil a single "promise" in any of this? Has he apologised for erroneous statements (lies) made to the house?
Not a chance that he will have a "world beating" track and trace operation set up in 12 days.
Not sure why it needs to be "world beating" I'd settle for "working".
Muttley
Well-known member
And as I post...
"A smartphone app for tracking people who have been in contact with Covid-19 patients will not be ready for 1 June, when the next stage of the government’s relaxation of lockdown is due to begin, Downing Street has confirmed."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-launch-contact-trace-scheme-uk-a9524191.html
"A smartphone app for tracking people who have been in contact with Covid-19 patients will not be ready for 1 June, when the next stage of the government’s relaxation of lockdown is due to begin, Downing Street has confirmed."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-launch-contact-trace-scheme-uk-a9524191.html