Sir Keir Starmer - Labour Party Leader

[Nefertiti2]

<sup>IMO the "twat"- is the person who is seriously advocating the Labour Party should say and do nothing in the teeth of corruption on this scale.

It's not difficult to imagine an alternative response.</sup>

https://twitter.com/papasombra/status/1363912719691350018?s=20

[Nefertiti2]

A well judged phrase could weaken hancock- and thereby Johnson.

Johnson's Captain Hindsight is the kind of thing I mean


The Secretary of State for Mates Rates

Hancock's half million.

When thousands were dying up and down the country he squeezed the lifeblood out of the NHS - and took a whole lot more than an armful

[Kowalski]

I can see the rationale for playing fair in a grave public crisis but it helps if your opponents play fair.

Here in Wales Tories conveniently compartmentalise the idea that THEIR party has been in charge of the UK government's Covid response for over a year to chip chip chip away at Labour; "The Cruel Rule" ....."Welsh Government is sitting on YOUR money that was given by US"......."We need a roadmap".... "Why can't all the schools come back like England" etc

[Etienne]

As you continue to engage with an imaginary argument I've not made, I will let you carry on demolishing it.

Ton Ton, I'm sure that the secretary of state is not really involved in operational matters, but even so, I can't imagine that those who are in charge of operational matters wouldn't be distracted by suddenly having to deal with a new Health Secretary.

[Nefertiti2]

the point is not about whether or not hancock resigns, the point is whether the labour party accepts the level of corruption of the Conservative Party.


You calling me a twat doesn't mean you have anything approaching an argument.

[Etienne]

the point is not about whether or not hancock resigns, the point is whether the labour party accepts the level of corruption of the Conservative Party.

That was indeed my exact fucking point.

[Nefertiti2]

you're in a bit of a mood tonight...

[Etienne]

Well, it is a bit frustrating that your approach to someone who you broadly agree with ideologically but who differs from you on a point of strategy is to wildy mischaracterise what I said as let's do nothing. (NHH and Ton Ton both managed to disagree with me while actually engaging with it, which is obviously the point of interacting on a message board) As you're obviously not stupid I could only assume you were missing the point deliberately, hence the "don't be a twat" comment. Then after much more tedious strawman incineration you tell me that the point is not Hancock personally but Tory corruption which is pretty much word for word what I said Starmer should have said in my first post.

[San Bernardhinault]

I don’t see what harm could be done if Hancock was kicked out on his arse. If someone is corrupt and incompetent you can’t just say “Yeah, whatevs. Whoever replaces them will probably also be corrupt and incompetent.” And you don’t want someone corrupt and incompetent in charge of health care during the worst pandemic in a century. I think the “What about the disruption?” argument doesn’t hold up if you’re disrupting the work of someone who is monumentally disastrous.

[Nocturnal Submission]

Question for Etienne, Dunc or NHH (does anyone else find that they can only @ one OTFer per post?): have the Greens seen an influx of ex-Labour Party members or supporters since Keith's leadership election victory?

[Duncan Gardner]

Nocturnal Submission not really AFAIK, although may have a better idea after our imminent Spring Conference. Etienne NHH

[Felicity, I guess so]

I did read Lucas was raising questions in the same vein as Corbyn's so the contrast in practice with Sir Keith might lead to another trickle

[DCI Harry Batt]

Ton Ton, I'm sure that the secretary of state is not really involved in operational matters, but even so, I can't imagine that those who are in charge of operational matters wouldn't be distracted by suddenly having to deal with a new Health Secretary.

Have to say, this seems a bit of a reach. "Some people might worry about having a new boss" is quite some way from where this started. I think it would be a pretty poor line for Boris Johnson to take, but understandable in his circumstances that he'd make any old excuse not to change his health secretary. I don't think there's a sound argument for anyone else to use it.

[Etienne]

I think it is a fair bit stronger than "would worry about a new boss". Hancock has been there long enough that I'm sure those working under him know what they are doing with his strategy. Learning their new bosses strategy and way of working would clearly be a distraction. Obviously this is not a massive issue, I'm not saying hundreds will die if we change health secretary, but it is an unprecedented situation for the NHS and any distraction is a negative. Sure, if the replacement would be an improvement then that would outweigh a temporary issue. But so abject is the Tory parliamentary party and so abject has been the choice of ministers that I can't believe that anyone chosen would be better.

Which is why I think it's better to keep the focus on the government being corrupt and incompetent, rather than Hancock personally.

[DCI Harry Batt]

I think it's an absolutely extraordinary thing to say, for anyone who isn't Hancock's boss who has to make excuses for keeping him. The NHS does not need him and would cope very well, thank you, with his removal. It would give some of us a massive boost, as it goes. The managerialist nonsense that changing the boss means "disruption" fundamentally misunderstands the organisation and how it works. And that's ignoring the particularities of this boss. Who is right now out there lying some more about where we came in.

It is not an either / or. You don't need to pretend that everything else is fine to push at one person. Pushing at that one person can weaken the government as a whole - again, that would be a good thing, not "a distraction at this unprecedented time".

[Artificial Hipster]

Meet the new boss etc

[Duncan Gardner]

In better news for the embattled supremo, Labour have laid the foundation for their campaign to retake control of Dudley Council.

Their candidate for the Stourbridge East ward is...Maz Qara

[johnr]

I did read Lucas was raising questions in the same vein as Corbyn's so the contrast in practice with Sir Keith might lead to another trickle

I've seen quite a few potential switchers being put off by a) Lucas's push for the second Ref, which they see as incoherent, and which led to the Tory government (let's not relitigate that here, just reporting what some have said), and b) Sian Green putting something out about 'racists not being welcome in the party' which of course on its own is entirely correct, but was seen as an insult to many in Labour who were being suspended/expelled for spurious reasons at that time.

Here in Brighton Pavilion - which is seen as both Corbyn- and Lucas-central - a number of Labour folk (including me) wouldn't switch on account of the lies (accompanied by an egregious graph) that Lucas openly told at the start of the 2017 campaign about 'a vote for Labour is effectively a vote for the Tories'. Her supporters finding out where we were canvassing and driving round following us to shout abuse was bound to put a few people off of switching too.

[DCI Harry Batt]

Didn't do her any harm mind. I hadn't quite clocked how enormously she's grown the Green vote there. From 21.9% in the last election before she stood (2005) up to 57.2% in her most recent (fourth) win there in 2019.

[johnr]

Oh indeed, she's done very well electorally, and got a big push in 2019 re the second ref in this constituency. I was just pointing out how members - rather then voters - might be averse to switching.

[DCI Harry Batt]

I remember my mum telling me stories of how dismissive Labour members were of the Greens in Pavilion (and Brighton more generally) before Lucas first got elected.

[johnr]

I've got little doubt that they were. There's some right horrible folk in the local party, with a real sense of entitlement. I voted Lucas in 2010 partly cos the previous Labour MP was - and, I've subsequently experienced, still is - a knob, and his supporters were/are often pretty rancid.

[MsD]

I want Zarah as our next Leader. For one thing, her name lends itself to being sung at rallies at football grounds. I’m trying to get Que Sera, Zarah off the ground, but there’s a lot you can do with Sultana.

[DCI Harry Batt]

Lepper? Awful man, yeah.

David Milliband will be the next leader, I reckon.

[Snake Plissken]

Hasn't he got to be an MP first?