Corbyn has the record for the most opposition defeats of a government in Parliament. And the largest defeat.
The pledges people talk about were made by Starmer in 2020 in the leadership contest. When people say he's broken his pledges they aren't saying anything about the 2019 election manifesto. I really don't get why you pretend not to understand that.
Why not just take it on the chin as a fair criticism? He lied to win the leadership.
This is just stupid. You need to get it in to your head that the people advocating for left wing policies are doing so cause they think those policies would actually be better for us. So for example with nationalising energy, the capitalist model's *rse falling out in a crisis is more reason to nationalise. Not less. It's not that we all secretly think nationalising the sector would be a really bad thing and we need to have a massively surging economy before we can indulge in it. If we're in a crisis, the change becomes more urgent.
Aye, largely because the Tories were so insistent on fighting themselves. How many of his own policies did he get in place?
Yes, 2020, before Covid, the War, Energy Crisis, Recession, do I need to go on? Should we enact the Labour policy from 1922? It's about as relevant. Some of the pledges will probably come back in the manifesto, some might get watered down, but they will be far better than the Tory alternatives.
He didn't lie, the world changed, and policies have to change with the times. You're trying to pick holes in someone who has been at the helm for a massive swing in labour popularity, and you're doing that without ignoring the failures of the guy who lost two elections.
I'm not saying more left-wing policies wouldn't be better, of course it would, especially for the vast majority who need them most, implying I think otherwise is disingenuous.
Kier Starmer will enact more left-wing policies than Corbyn, but even if you don't accept this then you have to accept that he will prevent right/ far-right policies as he will win.
The point is you need to win, to enact any of them, and the more you win by, the more freedom you will get with this.
I'm largely for Nationalising energy as a long-term plan (probably at least a decade or two), but I realise this is practically impossible anytime soon, as we don't own what we import, and we're going to need those imports for a long while yet. Can we move away from this model, and only use what we produce ourselves in the next 7 years (2 Tory, 5 Labour), possibly, but not likely. We likely won't have the money to do it (without hurting other areas), we don't have the labour or construction capacity to do it either, not without taking resources from other areas like infrastructure, house building, maintenance etc. To get the labour and efficient construction we would need freedom of movement, and closer ties with the EU on materials and such, effectively cancelling Brexit. If we did that it would possibly mean labour losing the 2030 election. So then you're back to Tories, doing Tory things, and the far right uprising again.
By the time we got everything nationalised and only used what we produce ourselves the energy crisis will no longer exist, as it will be solved by technology and green energy, whether the fossil fuel companies like it or not. The business model of buying out fossil fuel companies at their most expensive (and when they're not for sale), knowing full well energy prices and company values, as well as fossil fuel use will come back down is not a good investment. Just tax the hell out of the fossil fuel companies, and gradually build more renewables which we own ourselves. Take back control of Gas, Water, Electric, Telecom grids, but only if that's going to be profitable over 20-30 years, based on future expected energy prices.
Deary me. Again. Same disingenuous allegation how many times now?
