Starmer sacks shadow transport minister for appearing on picket line
- Thread starter InglebyUTB
- Start date
Laughing
Well-known member
Except I am not. That is exactly the covenant that is entered into bumface. No getting away from it.
I am off the opinion that whatever it takes to get the tories out of government is acceptable. My idealogical preference is neither here nor there at the moment. I am not a fan of starmer, but whatever it takes to stop human trafficking and our children starving it's an acceptable price to pay.
You on the other hand live in an ideal world that just doesn't exist.
Laughing
Well-known member
Nope. Starmer was voted as leader. There are mechanisms to remove him if the party are unhappy.
As I said above you can support the strike action without standing on a picket line. Politicians shouldn't get involved in this beyond trying to settle the dispute, something starmer has said he would do.
His mp's were told not to picket, that really is the start and end of this.
Not going to repeat what I said to bumface.
Randy
Well-known member
Senior Labour MP John McDonnell says he supports general strike and hits out at Sir Keir Starmer
A row over Labour's position on Wednesday's rail strikes has broken out as some in the party think MPs should be allowed on picket lines to call for pay rises to come in line with inflation despite Sir Keir Starmer forbidding both.
news.sky.com
Colgates_shaving_foam
Well-known member
The issue of whether to support (by joining picket lines) workers striking is an absolutely fundamental issue for the Labour Party. The clue is in the title.
If starmer is not prepared to support the workers then what is the point of him leading the party? What is he offering?
Of course I will vote Labour as it's anyone but the tories for me.
If starmer is not prepared to support the workers then what is the point of him leading the party? What is he offering?
Of course I will vote Labour as it's anyone but the tories for me.
1finny
Well-known member
I agree with you idealistically and certainly your last point.
If it wasn’t this issue - Labour supporters would be fighting about something else - its what we do.
Blair (who led the country for a 1/3 of the time Labour have ever led the country) is despised by labour members
So is Starmer
Plus ca change
The Ruthsayer
Well-known member
Laughing, are you disagreeing that SKS is a middle class metropolitan elite leader, or that this issue is so fundamental to Labour that showing solidarity with strikers must not result in being sacked?
I am standing by both statements, even if the former is a right-wing cliché.
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
Yes understand that but as the current leader he is entitled to expect his requirements to be followed even if his team disagree? Even in politics you have to have a bit of discipline.
The Tories are desperate for distraction at the moment and the unions will strike anyway, half of their members probably vote Tory anyway but you won’t see a Tory anywhere near a picket line.
FabioPorkpie
Well-known member
I think Mick Lynch sums up how I feel pretty well. Starmer’s team would do well to listen to what he says -
Ironops
Well-known member
Yeah because hardly anyone reads the daily mail, the second highest paid for newspaper in the UK...
FabioPorkpie
Well-known member
Yeah because hardly anyone reads the daily mail, the second highest paid for newspaper in the UK...
Yeah and they are all likely to go ‘hang on a second, seen this Starmer bloke? To hell with my right wing views, I’m voting Labour
!’And it’s irrelevant how many Mail readers might have their interest piqued by Starmer now, because come election time they’ll be putting the knife in good and proper.
It’s a bit like a Boro fan trying to convince readers of a Sunderland fanzine that they should start following Boro instead. Ahead of a Tees-Wear derby. It’s a complete waste of time and energy
Laughing
Well-known member
I disagree that Labour should show solidarity with strikers, by picketing with them. That is not the function of government. The function of government is to solve the strike issue. If Labour want to be seen as a government in waiting they have to behave as such.
On starmer being middle class, I don't care, I earn as much as he does.
I care about the issues I have already highlighted. That's not to say there are not other issues I care about, there are. Just right now, the ONLY thing that matters is that Starmer can garner enough votes to kick the tories out.
BlindBoyGrunt
Well-known member
It is also one of the most right wing newspapers in the UK and probably Western Europe.Yeah because hardly anyone reads the daily mail, the second highest paid for newspaper in the UK...
BlindBoyGrunt
Well-known member
And how long has this been the modus operandi of the Labour party?
Ironops
Well-known member
In the 2019 election Labour got 10m votes and the Tories got 14m. Even in 2017 Labour was still nearly 1m votes and 50 odd seats behind the Tories.Yeah and they are all likely to go ‘hang on a second, seen this Starmer bloke? To hell with my right wing views, I’m voting Labour
And it’s irrelevant how many Mail readers might have their interest piqued by Starmer now, because come election time they’ll be putting the knife in good and proper.
It’s a bit like a Boro fan trying to convince readers of a Sunderland fanzine that they should start following Boro instead. Ahead of a Tees-Wear derby. It’s a complete waste of time and energy
Its pretty simple really, you don't win elections by appealing to your base - you win by appealing to the broadest section of people you possibly can - that includes Mail, Sun, Express readers and everyone else you can reach.
You can have ideological purity and be in opposition forever or you can try and attract people who didn't vote for you last time and actually get into power. You cant have both, as has been proven in every election since the labour party was formed. Labour have never won an election without appealing to people outside of its natural base.
So carry on complaining about Starmer and shouting 'solidarity' and singing the red flag, and watch the country carry on voting for the Tories.
For me, any Labour govt will always be better than any Tory govt. Ive voted Labour at every election since 1992 - Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Miliband, and Corbyn. Ive not agreed with everything they have said or done but Ive voted for them anyway, because if you dont vote Labour, you inevitably get a Tory govt.
One more thing, in relation to a point about the country needing PR - Starmer was in favour of PR at the last conference and the membership overwhelmingly supported it - it was the block union vote that stopped it going through
I read a few years ago that Corbyn was the first Labour leader to ever publically support a strike action while they were leader. Which sounds bonkers and like it couldn't possibly be right. But since then I've never seen evidence that it was wrong. You'd have thought that during the 80s miners strike or the 1920s general strike or something like that the contemporaneous Labour leaders would have shown their support for workers but apparently not.
Think you may be misremembering that.
Keir Starmer made a huge mistake in not backing PR | Neal Lawson
Without proportional representation Labour faces years in opposition. But a progressive alliance could topple the Tories, says Compass director Neal Lawson
www.theguardian.com
I'm not so sure that's right. Labour have lost plenty of elections where they've had manifestos geared towards moderation and appealing to tories. 2015, 2010, 1992, 1987...
And the tories have won plenty of elections by most definitely appealing to their own base. Johnson's brexit win, Camerons austerity wins, Thatchers victories. These weren't conciliatory olive branches offering middle ground policies left wing folk could support.
I think boldness in politics is badly underrated. People respond to it. Blair's 1997 manifesto had devolution, House of Lords reform, election reform, and nationalising the rails all in there. It wasn't a wishy washy, moderate, tinker round the edges platform.
Ironops
Well-known member
The majority of people in the north, the red wall, natural labour voters, voted for Brexit.Think you may be misremembering that.
Keir Starmer made a huge mistake in not backing PR | Neal Lawson
Without proportional representation Labour faces years in opposition. But a progressive alliance could topple the Tories, says Compass director Neal Lawson
I'm not so sure that's right. Labour have lost plenty of elections where they've had manifestos geared towards moderation and appealing to tories. 2015, 2010, 1992, 1987...
And the tories have won plenty of elections by most definitely appealing to their own base. Johnson's brexit win, Camerons austerity wins, Thatchers victories. These weren't conciliatory olive branches offering middle ground policies left wing folk could support.
I think boldness in politics is badly underrated. People respond to it. Blair's 1997 manifesto had devolution, House of Lords reform, election reform, and nationalising the rails all in there. It wasn't a wishy washy, moderate, tinker round the edges platform.
Blair in 1997 promised to stick to Tory spending plans, not spaff loads of money renationalising everything - look at the responses above, if youre not with the left youre a Tory, they have no middle ground.
Unions vote down local Labour parties’ call to axe first past the post
Motion to back switch to proportional representation in elections fails at Labour conference
www.theguardian.com
YesStarmer may not have given it full throated support but it was the unions that killed PR
WoodallServices
Well-known member
Can’t argue with this but the worrying thing is you can’t just say to Starmer “ thanks for getting us into government now off you pop” and you end up with another decade of “New Labour” who did the square root of fcuk all to redress the balance.