Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sir Keir Starmer - Labour Party Leader

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Starmer doing his best to respond to that “ human rights lawyer” slur the Tories were using.

    Comment


      Originally posted by TonTon View Post
      There's no "has to". There's a convention. Keith can do what he likes here, and has chosen to do this.

      "They must support the Government in any divisions in the House. No PPS who votes against the Government in a division can retain their position."

      Presumably, when in opposition, 'government' becomes 'party position.'

      Comment


        Wikipedia describes a convention about government, yes. And Labour has generally followed the same or similar convention when in opposition, recently.

        Comment


          Originally posted by TonTon View Post
          Wikipedia describes a convention about government, yes. And Labour has generally followed the same or similar convention when in opposition, recently.
          The quote above is actually from the Commons library. (http://researchbriefings.files.parli...42/SN04942.pdf)

          Nothing 'bout it being a convention. It seems PPS are covered by the same rules as frontbenchers and if the leader (or in the case of a PPS, the minister / shadow) can't rely on them, they have to step down.

          Comment


            "There are no fixed consequences for disobeying the whip, with the penalties varying depending on the type of whip and the individual and political circumstances."

            https://www.instituteforgovernment.o...and-free-votes

            Comment


              I give in. It's not a very interesting point anyway, and it's a silly waste of everyone's time for me to try to persuade anyone.

              Comment


                That convention had always had leeway when it comes to matters of conscience. Whittome stated that this was one for her. Starmer felt that it wasn't.

                On the poll upthread: this is from the same pollster and newspaper that splashed when Labour drew level a month ago. Then didn't report it at all a fortnight ago when they dropped back 3 points. Fwiw, it's also the same duo that gave us fortnightly updates on how the country was going Remain from 2018-19, and that turned out well. Just for context.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by TonTon View Post
                  I give in. It's not a very interesting point anyway, and it's a silly waste of everyone's time for me to try to persuade anyone.
                  It is important, though. If it is more of a convention and less of a rule, then the 'resignation' is less defensible. I know the British constitution and parliamentary rules are arcane and not always codified; but it seems (based on the document I linked) this is a Thing That Must Be. If anyone can demonstrate otherwise, I'll happily accept it is so and DENOUNCE Starmer in the harshest terms.

                  I just don't see this as being quite the issue it initially appeared to be.

                  Comment


                    It was his decision to impose a whip on the issue of giving British soldiers term limits for punishment for war crimes in response to a campaign from the media, egged on by the far right. You may feel that he is making the Labour Party more electable, I have concerns about this because
                    • There shouldn't be term limits for war crimes
                    • We all know how this is going to be used
                    • He is a Human rights lawyer, who made his lawyer activism a key part of his bid for the Labour leadership
                    • He is using this to force young and talented left women out of the Shadow Cabinet
                    • There shouldn't be term limits for war crimes

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Lurgee View Post

                      It is important, though. If it is more of a convention and less of a rule, then the 'resignation' is less defensible. I know the British constitution and parliamentary rules are arcane and not always codified; but it seems (based on the document I linked) this is a Thing That Must Be. If anyone can demonstrate otherwise, I'll happily accept it is so and DENOUNCE Starmer in the harshest terms.

                      I just don't see this as being quite the issue it initially appeared to be.
                      We may have cross-posted. It's not A Thing That Must Be at all.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by johnr View Post
                        That convention had always had leeway when it comes to matters of conscience. Whittome stated that this was one for her. Starmer felt that it wasn't.

                        On the poll upthread: this is from the same pollster and newspaper that splashed when Labour drew level a month ago. Then didn't report it at all a fortnight ago when they dropped back 3 points. Fwiw, it's also the same duo that gave us fortnightly updates on how the country was going Remain from 2018-19, and that turned out well. Just for context.

                        Given the scheduled date of the next GE, the current government's majority, the pandemic and it's associated financial ramifications and Brexit, I can barely think of a time when such polls were more irrelevant.

                        Comment


                          Opinium also had the TIGs at 14%.

                          Comment


                            It's true that currently Starmer's more likely to win a bigger majority in Putney than a general election across the UK, but this just flags up the pigheaded idiocy of elements on both the Labour right and Labour left who don't think electoral reform is an important issue.

                            As my man Jez Gilbert says here, which is completely true:
                            https://twitter.com/jemgilbert/status/1308348178786385920

                            Comment


                              Wasn't it only a one-line whip to abstain? If you get sacked for opposing a one-line whip, what exactly is the difference between a one-line and three-line.

                              Mind you, the issue for me isn't so much the sackings as the party line in the first place.

                              Comment


                                @E10- Aye. Labour's base isn't the grandkids of Cannock coalminers or Bromwich boilermakers (despite KS visiting last week). Current reality is more GRUB-by: graduates, renters, unionised, BAME. All of them combined managed only 34% in England in the GE

                                Comment


                                  I do think there's a natural base beyond that 34% and that it might include *some* of yer grandkids of Cannock coalminers etc, but yeah, there's lots of wilful misreading and mythologising of the 'red wall' places in the north and Midlands. Only a matter of time before they start getting invoked as The Plain People of England in the Flann O'Brien style.

                                  Anyone would think that there'd never been northern working-class Tories before Corbyn, when places like Liverpool actually had Tory MPs and Tory councils in the postwar period

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by Snake Plissken View Post
                                    That last bit is so "Now is not the time to talk about gun control".
                                    It's broadly correct though. At the moment, he should be attacking Johnson. Policy is going to have to formulated for an election in three years time post-Brexit post-Covid.

                                    That's not to let him off the hook for not actually attacking Johnson and reversing policy promises.

                                    Comment


                                      Climate change doesn't really tie in with the electoral cycle in the UK.

                                      Last GE, Labour were pilloried for coming up with too many policies 'pulled out of a hat'. You have to build a consensus over time, years, for any policy in order for the populace to shift, gradually. It's how the Brexiteers got their way.

                                      Comment


                                        I am not sure whether I am arguing with you or against now but doing the Britain First stuff is exactly the sort of broad brush stuff that the Brexiteers started off (and arguably went all the way through) with.

                                        Also, it is not only the electoral cycle but, as I say, Brexit and Covid that is going on and, at least with the latter, no-one really knows what the fall out is going to look like.

                                        Comment


                                          That's fair enough. I just think that you've got to lay out your basic programme - what you believe in, where you start from - at the beginning, then build on it as circumstances shift. There are narratives out there of how we can build back through/after Covid. It can't do any harm to lay some of your core beliefs on the line, otherwise people will quickly think that you have none. 'Captain Hindsight' was a cheap jibe from Johnson, but fwiw I've already seen it sticking around on social media.

                                          He's losing parts of what could be part of Labour's constituency - young people, renters, climate change campaigners, Black Lives Matter - cos he won't make a stand. Of course, he'll be attracting others I guess who are against those things (or at least, that must be the strategy). Not sure that's the right thing to be doing, though.

                                          An example https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-red-wall-tory

                                          Comment


                                            johnr I'm fairly sure that from Labour/ the Oppo generally's POV it's the wrong thing.

                                            Starmer seems already to have accepted that Scotland is lost electorally. The next step must be some form of co-operative strategy to attack the Tories in Southern England- scale alone makes that more important than trying to balance getting back lost kippers against holding onto what I called the GRUB generation above.

                                            Comment


                                              this analysis of Starmer's relaunch is quite insightful, I thought

                                              Comment


                                                Wasn't quite sure where to put this Owen Hatherley piece - on cities, towns, planning and the new Labour/Tory divide - so I'll stick it here. Well worth a read.

                                                Comment


                                                  i really like owen hatherley- and that's a great piece- thanks E10.

                                                  I probably wouldn't have found it otherwise. shunning the Guardian as I do
                                                  Last edited by Nefertiti2; 30-09-2020, 19:06.

                                                  Comment


                                                    Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View Post
                                                    I probably wouldn't have found it otherwise. shunning the Guardian as I do
                                                    No paywall helps.

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X