Sir Keir’s Kerfuffle

[Carth]

Originally Posted by jfman

The Opposition can't do anything to get rid of the disease.

What you are asking for is the opposition to simply stop and agree with everything the Government does regardless of how bad it may be. Sounds more communist than socialist now you phrase it like that.

It can hardly be 'political games' to hold the Government to account during the biggest public health crisis of our lifetimes.

It seems they did, and then replaced it with another . . . with possibly the same symptoms?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

.... and now Starmer is saying we must never have austerity again. Who's going to keep lending to us cheaply if the debt is out of control? Jeez, he's almost as bad as the last fool.

Same place Rishi is getting it from?

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Taking it as an honest question:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...w-cabinet-role

... and why shouldn't I raise this as often as context allows?

From your link

Earlier this week Rebecca Long-Bailey, the shadow business secretary and the candidate favoured by the Corbyn wing of the party, said she would want to offer him a senior role if she won the imminent ballot of members.

The other two remaining candidates: Keir Starmer, the favourite, and Lisa Nandy, have not made similar offers,]

Because it is a straw man scaremongering tactic, with no documented basis in reality?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Hugh

From your link

Because it is a straw man scaremongering tactic, with no documeneted basis in reality?

Quite a credit to Sir Keir that the scaremongering has started so early!

[denphone]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Quite a credit to Sir Keir that the scaremongering has started so early!

l thought he was pretty sober and pragmatic on the Marr show.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by denphone

l thought he was pretty sober and pragmatic on the Marr show.

He is, but objective reality doesn't stop the right wing smears. Brown, Miliband, Corbyn... Starmer is just next on the list.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by jfman

He is, but objective reality doesn't stop the right wing smears. Brown, Miliband, Corbyn... Starmer is just next on the list.

He has only been in the job for a day but quelle surprise the ad hominem attacks have already started unsurprisingly.

Originally Posted by denphone

He has only been in the job for a day but quelle surprise the ad hominem attacks have already started unsurprisingly.

The fact that as DPP he presided over the decision not to prosecute Jimmy Saville for “lack of evidence” is not an ad hominem attack. The judgment of a man who wants to be prime minister is very much a relevant issue.

Originally Posted by Chris

The fact that as DPP he presided over the decision not to prosecute Jimmy Saville for “lack of evidence” is not an ad hominem attack. The judgment of a man who wants to be prime minister is very much a relevant issue.

Much like the judgement of a man who prorogued Parliament unlawfully - if BJ gets away with it because he was told by his Attorney General that doing it was legal, doesn't the same caveat apply to Keir Starmer (he would have gone on the advice of his legal team).

Most of the accusations about Saville came out after his death - here are the four that came out before his death.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...e-8447827.html

A review of the CPS decisions and the police action concluded that a prosecution could have been possible in three out of the four cases. At the time the CPS lawyer concluded that because none of the victims wished to give evidence, no prosecutions could be brought.

However, the review of their actions by the DPP found police should have told victims they were not alone in making complaints, and that the CPS lawyer should have challenged police conclusions.

People can call into question Starmer's leadership of the CPS, it's entirely fair, that said he doesn't appear he did much wrong with the Saville case.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Chris

And extraordinary times they have been ... yet we still have a Tory government and one with a bigger majority than Cameron had in 2015.

In fact, things really don’t tend to change dramatically. Even the 1997 Labour landslide occurred after 18 years of Tory government, and Tony Blair’s major success was putting a fresh face on continuity. The Tories looked worn out, and out of ideas. Blair looked young and energetic but none of his new ideas actually changed very much; not in the first term anyway.

British electoral history since WW2 suggests a majority the size Boris has now can be reduced by an effective Labour campaign in 2024 but Starmer has next to no chance of actually winning it.

As I probably said at the time, I don't actually think DC was that great a leader, or even particularly liked. I think he was just disliked less than the leaders of the other parties. In short, I think the Tories won the election not because they fought well, but because the other parties fought more badly than they did.

[pip08456]

First shadow cabinet appointments.

Anneliese Dodds Shadow Chancellor
Lisa Nandy Shadow Foreign Secretary
Nick Thomas-Symonds Shadow Home Secretary
Rachel Reeves Shadow Chancellor is the Duchy of Lancaster
Jonathan Ashworth Shadow Health Secretary.

[nashville]

I hope he does well in Scotland and get rid of the /S N P, for good.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nashville

I hope he does well in Scotland and get rid of the /S N P, for good.

Needs a policy platform first. SNP win at a canter because all other parties split essentially the same voter base. Can't out Tory the Tories when it comes to union flag waving.

Anneliese Dodds Shadow Chancellor
Lisa Nandy Shadow Foreign Secretary
Nick Thomas-Symonds Shadow Home Secretary
Rachel Reeves Shadow Chancellor is the Duchy of Lancaster
Jonathan Ashworth Shadow Health Secretary.

Wow!

Not a criticism, just a comment - can’t ever remember a Shadow Chancellor with 3 years Parliamentary experience, and a Shadow Home Secretary with 5 years Parliamentary experience.