Keir Starmer Labour Leader

[Paul the Wolf]

I suspect it will be virtually impossible, the world situation is changing and in the UK some fundamental changes (in my terms, a 'social contract') will need to be made first. Whilst lots of people would vote differently if they could, there is not a great ground swell of opinion mounting to try to persuade any future HM government to reapply to the EU.
The EU itself is only 'trundling along', the political will to move forward has disappeared, it would take the arrival of another Jacques Delor to lay down the future 'lines of travel'and persuade governments to take it.

Trade between the EU and the UK is important, but most politicians in both camps and in particular those who survived the Brexit debacle, will stay firmly away from even a hint of the same arguments reappearing. There are too many other important issues arising, climate, energy, migration, etc that all want managing not just in the EU and UK, but across the northern hemisphere in particular, in response to changes in the southern hemisphere.
Power is shifting, East and South, challenges to the US domination is occurring and the present middle east situation is likely to be the catalyst for further developments, many balanced on a knife edge for years to come, especially if Trump gets re-elected.
France and Germany will have a hard time holding the EU steady, many of the eastern EU members are already looking over their shoulders, not just about Ukraine, but about what happens next.

Under pressure and with due diligence rules and regulations can be amended, the UK has (wisely in my opinion) decided to keep most of its EU 'friendly' laws this will be somewhere for Starmer to start looking how to fix the post Brexit situation.

The EU is expanding, eastwards. More eastern European countries will join. This will happen over the coming years.

In the meantime, according to Labour, they will not be spending any money outside their fiscal rules until the economy grows. Trade with the EU is not just important, it's vital for the UK, not so much for the EU in the opposite direction , they've got many countries of their own to trade with. But this has been pointed out time and time again but few people in the UK listen. Just cannot get this across for some reason because everything will be alright.

So as it stands Labour will not be changing or improve the UK because not only will trade not improve, it will get worse because of Phase 2 and even more so in Phase 3.

Nearly eight years of repeating the same thing and the large parts of the UK are still in denial.
Reality will dawn on the country during Starmer's watch if he gets in - what happens then?

 

[Frosty]

Liz Truss wanted unfunded tax cuts to help the wealthiest (funny how they say they’re against the Metropolitan Liberal Elite, yet all of their policies are beneficial to them!) and it nearly collapsed our economy.

What do you think would happen if, going the other way (ideologically I’m all for it, seeing it as a long term investment in the country), Starmer announced £50bn of borrowing?

@Sweet Square Ever read David Graeber's work?

He died recently but his Debt: The First 5,000 Years has been made available for free by the University of Warwick: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/engl...s201516/graeber-debt_the_first_5000_years.pdf

 

[Wibble]

I suspect it will be virtually impossible, the world situation is changing, and in the UK some fundamental changes (in my terms, a 'social contract') will need to be made first. Whilst lots of people would vote differently if they could, there is not a great ground swell of opinion mounting to try to persuade any future HM government to reapply to the EU.
The EU itself is only 'trundling along', the political will to move forward has disappeared, it would take the arrival of another Jacques Delor to lay down the future 'lines of travel'and persuade governments to take it.

Trade between the EU and the UK is important, but most politicians in both camps and in particular those who survived the Brexit debacle, will stay firmly away from even a hint of the same arguments reappearing. There are too many other important issues arising, climate, energy, migration, etc that all want managing not just in the EU and UK, but across the northern hemisphere in response to changes in the southern hemisphere.
Power is shifting, East and South, challenges to the US domination is occurring and the present middle east situation is likely to be the catalyst for further developments, many balanced on a knife edge for years to come, especially if Trump gets re-elected.
France and Germany will have a hard time holding the EU steady, many of the eastern EU members are already looking over their shoulders, not just about Ukraine, but about what happens next.

Under pressure and with due diligence rules and regulations can be amended, the UK has (wisely in my opinion) decided to keep most of its EU 'friendly' laws this will be somewhere for Starmer to start looking how rse to fix the post Brexit situation.

Even assuming the EU would want the UK back.

The sensible thing would be to beg and grovel to get back in but I think the UK is now too big of a basket case for it happen any time soon (if ever).

 

[Wibble]

The EU is expanding, eastwards. More eastern European countries will join. This will happen over the coming years.

In the meantime, according to Labour, they will not be spending any money outside their fiscal rules until the economy grows. Trade with the EU is not just important, it's vital for the UK, not so much for the EU in the opposite direction , they've got many countries of their own to trade with. But this has been pointed out time and time again but few people in the UK listen. Just cannot get this across for some reason because everything will be alright.

So as it stands Labour will not be changing or improve the UK because not only will trade not improve, it will get worse because of Phase 2 and even more so in Phase 3.

Nearly eight years of repeating the same thing and the large parts of the UK are still in denial.
Reality will dawn on the country during Starmer's watch if he gets in - what happens then?

The UK seems to be forever weighed down by the idiocy that made us leave in the first place.

 

[Sweet Square]

Liz Truss wanted unfunded tax cuts to help the wealthiest (funny how they say they’re against the Metropolitan Liberal Elite, yet all of their policies are beneficial to them!) and it nearly collapsed our economy.

What do you think would happen if, going the other way (ideologically I’m all for it, seeing it as a long term investment in the country), Starmer announced £50bn of borrowing?

Tbf everyone would know that pledge would be meaningless rubbish. But say Corbyn did win back in 2019 then I think we would have seen a Liz Trust economic meltdown times 100. Along with institutional meltdown in civil services, army, police and with Labour MP’s. It would have been a national crisis. But this is why I’m a socialist. I believe capitalism activity undermines over time the ability of people to live a decent life.

I’ve already posted this yesterday in another thread but it’s worth putting in here -



A lot of left wing people should ask themselves this type of question.

@Sweet Square Ever read David Graeber's work?

He died recently but his Debt: The First 5,000 Years has been made available for free by the University of Warwick: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/engl...s201516/graeber-debt_the_first_5000_years.pdf

Cheers. I’ve watched his a number of his talks but never read his book debt. A few good few years back I made a thread on his bullshit jobs theory. I super gutted when I found he passed away.


His take on extreme centrism was very good

 

[Paul the Wolf]

The UK seems to be forever weighed down by the idiocy that made us leave in the first place.

It was a life-changing moment that was taken far too lightly. People were conned completely. But now we're in the transition period where you've still got Labour saying and as well as Reform that Brexit will be alright - it's just not implemented properly. This is even more ridiculous than the initial decision. There's no easy answer but the path the country is currently on is certainly not it.

There are still a few more bullets they can shoot themselves in the foot with. Breaking international law with Rwanda and the Freeport debacle still to come.

 

[Sweet Square]

Whoops!

 

[Raven]

Whoops!

Other than them being morally bankrupt establishment drones it always winds me up just how bad they are in front of a camera.

 

[Dobba]

Whoops!

 

[Maticmaker]

The sensible thing would be to beg and grovel to get back in but I think the UK is now too big of a basket case for it happen any time soon (if ever).

............ you really think that will happen, again? General de Gaulle had us pegged from the beginning..

 

[Wibble]

............ you really think that will happen, again?

No. We are far to stupid a nation to do that. Obviously.

 

[Sweet Square]

It’s amazing how stupid Starmer position is

 

[Frosty]

Whoops!

I can see the car crash interview already.

Starmer is sitting down during the election campaign. Interviewer X asks him his views on a 'Tory policy'. Starmer trots out a line condemning it and everything about it. Interviewer X reveals it is a Labour policy in the Labour manifesto.

 

[Bert_]

............ you really think that will happen, again? General de Gaulle had us pegged from the beginning..

It will have to happen at some point. Sans Empire, we ain't all that. We need the EU to stay relevant. No way around it apart from accepting a back seat in US trade deals.

De Gaulle and Churchill were quite keen on a merger between the UK and France at one point during the war. Strange how quicly things can change.

 

[Sweet Square]

I can see the car crash interview already.

Starmer is sitting down during the election campaign. Interviewer X asks him his views on a 'Tory policy'. Starmer trots out a line condemning it and everything about it. Interviewer X reveals it is a Labour policy in the Labour manifesto.

I haven’t read it so might be bollocks but
apparently in Oliver Eagleton book - The Starmer Project: A Journey to the Right. There’s a section on the Brexit negotiations between Labour and the Tories. Starmer was the Shadow Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. One time the Tories pretty much copied Labour policy and showed Starmer. He laughed at it and called it unrealistic rubbish and then of course it was relieved to he that it was actually his own position. Starmer went very red and quite.

Again could be a load of rubbish but wouldn’t surprise me if it was true.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I can see the car crash interview already.

Starmer is sitting down during the election campaign. Interviewer X asks him his views on a 'Tory policy'. Starmer trots out a line condemning it and everything about it. Interviewer X reveals it is a Labour policy in the Labour manifesto.

In 2020 I don't think Starmer knew to which country the UK they sold arms to. Maybe he's just found out which is why he says he needs to review it.

You can see why Starmer keeps so quiet. Things happen all around him but he seems almost completely ignorant on almost every subject. This coming year should be fun to watch when he has to speak in the open on the campaign trail (and even more so if he becomes PM). And every time he does speak he puts his foot right in it.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

Murdoch is Starmer’s paymaster? Here is page one results when you search for ‘The Sun Keir Starmer’

• Starmer was head of CPS during Horizon scandal, Tories seek amswers
• Starmer worked for free to save baby killers and axe murderers
• Sunak slams Starmer for having no plan
• Keir Starmer must never be forgiven for using a spurious medieval loophole to put investigative journalism in the dock
• Sir Keir and Sir Ed are at heart of Post Office knightmare – they looked other way instead of helping the little people

And that’s a 5 second piece of research. So swing-and-a-miss on that one.

As for the Davros/Banking/Hedgefund lot, aren’t they the non-dom lot whose loopholes Starmer is looking to close?

That's because Starmers strategy of cosying up to the right wing press won't work. He'll get into power (because the Tories have self destructed), make no change, then lose the next GE. Clinical.

 

[Jippy]

That's because Starmers strategy of cosying up to the right wing press won't work. He'll get into power (because the Tories have self destructed), make no change, then lose the next GE. Clinical.

The odds of a tiny Tory majority or hung parliament must be pretty high now. Starmer is awful and no-one trusts him, similar to Sunak, but the latter is backed to the hilt by the press and a vaguely better speaker who doesn't permanently look confused.

 

[nickm]

That's because Starmers strategy of cosying up to the right wing press won't work. He'll get into power (because the Tories have self destructed), make no change, then lose the next GE. Clinical.

Let's not give too much credence to your predictions on this, given your track record so far.

 

[Raven]

The odds of a tiny Tory majority or hung parliament must be pretty high now. Starmer is awful and no-one trusts him, similar to Sunak, but the latter is backed to the hilt by the press and a vaguely better speaker who doesn't permanently look confused.

The beauty of this situation is that the Tories get in either way.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

Let's not give too much credence to your predictions on this, given your track record so far.

Please elaborate.

 

[711]

The odds of a tiny Tory majority or hung parliament must be pretty high now. Starmer is awful and no-one trusts him, similar to Sunak, but the latter is backed to the hilt by the press and a vaguely better speaker who doesn't permanently look confused.

Current odds are most seats, as opposed to majority, Tories 13/2 against, Labour 2/17 on. Anyone that thinks Labour won't get most seats should get a bet on the Tories now, given the electoral cycle this is likely their low point. Free money, what more do you want?

I find neither odds tempting personally.

 

[Jippy]

Current odds are most seats, as opposed to majority, Tories 13/2 against, Labour 2/17 on. Anyone that thinks Labour won't get most seats should get a bet on the Tories now, given the electoral cycle this is likely their low point. Free money, what more do you want?

I find neither odds tempting personally.

The odds aren't great. I bet on a hung parliament under May and got about 10-1 from memory. You can see Starmer having a bacon sandwich, Kinnock in the waves, 'weak and wobbly' moment(s).

 

[Maticmaker]

It will have to happen at some point. Sans Empire, we ain't all that. We need the EU to stay relevant. No way around it apart from accepting a back seat in US trade deals.

De Gaulle and Churchill were quite keen on a merger between the UK and France at one point during the war. Strange how quicly things can change.

Only in a 'time-travel' context and if H G Wells is involved.

Staying relevant hasn't done us much good, in my lifetime, cost us sh** loads of money and lives in wars we should never have been involved in. Harold Wilson was the last PM to refuse to get involved in conflicts that were nothing to do with us,

"The more things change the more they stay the same"!!! (someone once said)

 

[Badunk]

The dollar is going to drop, the pound has been rising. Interest rates are going to drop a lot. The money printer will be turned on sooner rather than later. If Labour don't grab the opportunity to invest in infrastructure and build houses, they are stupid. More austerity will bring the country to its knees.

 

[2mufc0]

 

[nickm]

The odds aren't great. I bet on a hung parliament under May and got about 10-1 from memory. You can see Starmer having a bacon sandwich, Kinnock in the waves, 'weak and wobbly' moment(s).

I'd take that bet. Look at the telegraphs polling today. Real Tory panic for the first time today. Most likely outcome is a massive labour majority of over 100 but the Tories getting wiped out down to 70 or seats isn't completely unrealistic. I think the country has made its mind up it's time for a change.

 

[nickm]

The dollar is going to drop, the pound has been rising. Interest rates are going to drop a lot. The money printer will be turned on sooner rather than later. If Labour don't grab the opportunity to invest in infrastructure and build houses, they are stupid. More austerity will bring the country to its knees.

Debt interest repayments are currently 110bn a year, it's an enormous sum especially in the context of flat economic growth. Interest rates are still expected to be 4.25% until end of 2026, still high in the context of govt debt. I'm not sure labour has huge room for manoeuvre on borrowing. I'd would expect taxes to go up instead. Agree we need to build (as well as reform planning).

 

[Smores]

Debt interest repayments are currently 110bn a year, it's an enormous sum especially in the context of flat economic growth. Interest rates are still expected to be 4.25% until end of 2026, still high in the context of govt debt. I'm not sure labour has huge room for manoeuvre on borrowing. I'd would expect taxes to go up instead. Agree we need to build (as well as reform planning).

Where you getting that figure from? Gilts are already below 4% and predicted to edge towards 3% by the time Labour are in a position to start passing policy.

Putting taxes up just as the country gets a handle on inflation and may be ready for some growth will kill any recovery dead.

 

[nickm]

Where you getting that figure from? Gilts are already below 4% and predicted to edge towards 3% by the time Labour are in a position to start passing policy.

Bank of England monetary policy report November 2023.

 

[nickm]

Where you getting that figure from? Gilts are already below 4% and predicted to edge towards 3% by the time Labour are in a position to start passing policy.

Putting taxes up just as the country gets a handle on inflation and may be ready for some growth will kill any recovery dead.

I agree with you re: taxes, I'm just looking at stuff like the rise in pension spending alone over the next decade (increasing % of GDP) and wondering how it all gets paid for when growth is flat. Either you borrow it (not ideal) or you tax it or you cut something to pay for it.

I don't have any answers, I am just saying labour are going to have a tough time, there is no simple way of digging us out of the hole the Tories have made for us.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

That's because Starmers strategy of cosying up to the right wing press won't work. He'll get into power (because the Tories have self destructed), make no change, then lose the next GE. Clinical.

Let's not give too much credence to your predictions on this, given your track record so far.

Please elaborate.

@nickm If you can't back up your posts maybe you should refrain from making misleading comments. I'm still waiting patiently to hear any previous predictions I've made.

 

[Smores]

Bank of England monetary policy report November 2023.

It's been a while so could be wrong but beyond a minor inflation consideration don't see how BOE monetary policy impacts government borrowing? The 10 year gilts are far more relevant as that's the borrowing mechanism no?

This country made a massive mistake not investing when government borrowing was previously low. If it makes that mistake again feck knows where we'll be.

We need Labour to borrow to come through with it's Green pledges that Reeves is trying to bin. It'll pay for itself and drive the right type of sustainable industry, help energy security, and control future inflation.

 

[Fully Fledged]

Because he wants Labour to win and win big... If Labour doesn't win big, then as Starmer hasn't raised any real expectations, he will have a fight on his hands, from left and right.

It's not a 'genius political move' (those are your words)... it's common sense for an opposition leader in his current position. True, he's upset some on the left, but who are they going to vote for if not Labour? If they vote for anyone else there is the danger of letting the Tories off the hook by returning Labour with a low/slim majority... enough to govern maybe, but not enough to be in power and to make changes that count.



At this point in time, that's all Starmer has to be..!

Keep the faith... that's what's wanted Paul....!!

Leftwingers don't want a Labour victory. They want a hung parliament so that he has to commit to PR to get into power.

 

[Drainy]

Was interesting listening to Alastair Campbell the other day about the electorate going back to the Tories in the months before an election and polls tightening.

Let's see if the new new Labour strategy works out

 

[Maticmaker]

Leftwingers don't want a Labour victory. They want a hung parliament so that he has to commit to PR to get into power.

Yes, that's probably true, the problem is history tells us that hung parliaments don't bring PR.

What is likely to happen is Labour, without a sizeable majority will attempt to struggle on, either as the largest party, or with a slim majority. Thereby being in government but not in with the power to make real changes.

Next GE the Tory's will get back again and the 'merry-go-round' starts again, it's a political reality in the UK that no party that wins a sizeable majority under FPTP will ever vote for PR, it's the 'turkey's voting for Christmas' stuff! In any case there is then the problem of deciding what sort of PR system would we have?

One of the problems of us not having a written Constitution.

 

[Smores]

Was interesting listening to Alastair Campbell the other day about the electorate going back to the Tories in the months before an election and polls tightening.

Let's see if the new new Labour strategy works out

That's just a political reality for Labour and there's no getting away from it. Labour will need around a 12% lead to get the majority they want and voting intention polling is always wide of the mark by a hefty margin 6-12 months out.

What's the gap now 19%? It doesn't leave a lot of room at all. All these landslide calculations based on current polling paint a very misleading picture.

 

[Frosty]

Yes, that's probably true, the problem is history tells us that hung parliaments don't bring PR.

What is likely to happen is Labour, without a sizeable majority will attempt to struggle on, either as the largest party, or with a slim majority. Thereby being in government but not in with the power to make real changes.

Next GE the Tory's will get back again and the 'merry-go-round' starts again, it's a political reality in the UK that no party that wins a sizeable majority under FPTP will ever vote for PR, it's the 'turkey's voting for Christmas' stuff! In any case there is then the problem of deciding what sort of PR system would we have?

One of the problems of us not having a written Constitution.

You want a written constitution? Like other democracies? Which ensures power is constrained and gives citizens enforceable rights? But that's not how we do things...

 

[Bert_]

You want a written constitution? Like other democracies? Which ensures power is constrained and gives citizens enforceable rights? But that's not how we do things...

 

[Ibi Dreams]

I'd take that bet. Look at the telegraphs polling today. Real Tory panic for the first time today. Most likely outcome is a massive labour majority of over 100 but the Tories getting wiped out down to 70 or seats isn't completely unrealistic. I think the country has made its mind up it's time for a change.

Shame we won't actually get much of it when Labour win