Topic: Keir Starmer: your views?

[oldfordie]

I'll give you that your syntax is superior to oldfordie's - and only that. In every other respect, fordie is a Colossus to your minnow. Fordie has been one of the most coherent and educational voices at RAWK on a wide variety of subjects, but in particular, Brexit, tariffs, the Single Market, the Customs Union, trade barriers, etc. He's also a thoroughly nice chap. On the other hand, we have you: who chose to insult you interlocutor rather than respond in substance, are stuck in the past (and misunderstand it), and blind to the real and recent damage done to the Party during (and as a result of) Corbyn's tenure. And 'McDonnell is your ideal candidate' to lead the Party!? Clearly the prospect of Labour continuing to remain in Opposition ad infinitum excites you.

Thanks Jiminy, I remember talking to a old work m8 on the phone about Corbyn when he bacame leader back in 2015. to be honest he came out the blue for me and am sure many others as well, it was just a few knowledgeable posters on here that made alarm bells ring, I remember the first post well, "The Labour party put a hand grenade in it's mouth today and pulled the pin"
Anyway I was talking to him about the influence Corbyn was having on the Labour party, the people he was involved with politically, the SWP etc etc, reaction I got was predictable as we had both been forced to meet these people on a daily basis when they stood outside our factory for years handing out pamphlets and preaching to us about bringing down the capitalist system. how it only takes another Ford strike to bring about it's downfall.
 "Not them arseholes again"
Yep they are now taking over the party and influencing the young.
"They are a bunch of cranks nobody takes them serious do they"
It's happening sadly, were fuck..
IMO. go back decades and people from Liverpool etc etc knew these people were cranks, they wouldn't have nothing to do with them, the young today don't see them like that anymore, the internet has given them respectability. it's a tragedy.

[Yorkykopite]

Thanks Jiminy, I remember talking to a old work m8 on the phone about Corbyn when he bacame leader back in 2015. to be honest he came out the blue for me and am sure many others as well, it was just a few knowledgeable posters on here that made alarm bells ring, I remember the first post well, "The Labour party put a hand grenade in it's mouth today and pulled the pin"
Anyway I was talking to him about the influence Corbyn was having on the Labour party, the people he was involved with politically, the SWP etc etc, reaction I got was predictable as we had both been forced to meet these people on a daily basis when they stood outside our factory for years handing out pamphlets and preaching to us about bringing down the capitalist system. how it only takes another Ford strike to bring about it's downfall.
 "Not them arseholes again"
Yep they are now taking over the party and influencing the young.
"They are a bunch of cranks nobody takes them serious do they"
It's happening sadly, were fuck..
IMO. go back decades and people from Liverpool etc etc knew these people were cranks, they wouldn't have nothing to do with them, the young today don't see them like that anymore, the internet has given them respectability. it's a tragedy.

It's not all bad news Fordie. They are less on the inside track than they were in the Corbyn years. My own view has long been that such militants have a limited impact not (mainly) because their ideology is so crude and useless, but because their characters are so boring. It's just so fucking tedious being around such humourless bores. You sort of have to be one yourself to find them good company. John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn......

...need I go on?

[oldfordie]

It's not all bad news Fordie. They are less on the inside track than they were in the Corbyn years. My own view has long been that such militants have a limited impact not (mainly) because their ideology is so crude and useless, but because their characters are so boring. It's just so fucking tedious being around such humourless bores. You sort of have to be one yourself to find them good company. John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn......

...need I go on?

I hope you're right but I think they have set any serious hope of progress back possibly decades. the effect of direct political campaigning may improve but not everyone listens to politicians, I think many follow the opinions of friends as they seem to think they are the most clued up. this is where the damage has really been done for me. I still think of that Momentum video in 2017 showing Momentum campaigners approaching a group of younger people on a council estate asking them if they were thinking of voting Labour in the GE. reply was NO. Labour have never done nothing for me.
Am convinced they were totally clueless when it comes to politics except for this view. Labour had done nothing for them. so you have to wonder how they formed this opinion. some d/head gave them that opinion and they will tell other m8s. you would of thought the left would have learned the lesson. nope. 6 months before the next GE in 2019 Corbyns telling anyone who will listen that the last Labour government ignored them. 6 months later he's asking people to Vote Labour.

Not sure which I prefer best, a ticket for a Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Michael Gove comedy stand up show or a Corbyn/McDonnell gig. I would choose the Corbyn gig. Gove has never made me laugh even when he has tried to be funny. Corbyn has had me literately in hysterics a couple of times since 2015 but am pretty certain he never meant to be funny.

[Sangria]

I hope you're right but I think they have set any serious hope of progress back possibly decades. the effect of direct political campaigning may improve but not everyone listens to politicians, I think many follow the opinions of friends as they seem to think they are the most clued up. this is where the damage has really been done for me. I still think of that Momentum video in 2017 showing Momentum campaigners approaching a group of younger people on a council estate asking them if they were thinking of voting Labour in the GE. reply was NO. Labour have never done nothing for me.
Am convinced they were totally clueless when it comes to politics except for this view. Labour had done nothing for them. so you have to wonder how they formed this opinion. some d/head gave them that opinion and they will tell other m8s. you would of thought the left would have learned the lesson. nope. 6 months before the next GE in 2019 Corbyns telling anyone who will listen that the last Labour government ignored them. 6 months later he's asking people to Vote Labour.

Not sure which I prefer best, a ticket for a Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Michael Gove comedy stand up show or a Corbyn/McDonnell gig. I would choose the Corbyn gig. Gove has never made me laugh even when he has tried to be funny. Corbyn has had me literately in hysterics a couple of times since 2015 but am pretty certain he never meant to be funny.

When I think of the times that my parents told me about the things the then (Labour) government did for them, and then I think of them telling me about all the cuts to services that the current (Tory) government were making, I wonder whether I had it wrong all along, and this bloke who doesn't even live in this country has it right all along. Maybe my parents were wrong about all the public services they used that were plentifully funded back in the day, and the last Labour government did nothing except invade Iraq as this gentleman tells us.

[oldfordie]

When I think of the times that my parents told me about the things the then (Labour) government did for them, and then I think of them telling me about all the services that the current (Tory) government were making, I wonder whether I had it wrong all along, and this bloke who doesn't even live in this country has it right all along. Maybe my parents were wrong about all the public services they used that were plentifully funded back in the day, and the last Labour government did nothing except invade Iraq as this gentleman tells us.

A lot of those services came too late to help me but I always praised and defended the Labour MPs for having the intelligence to bring them in, they not only improved lives dramatically they also saved the country a fortune, I feel sorry for all those Labour MPs who did their best only to be vilified for every wrong decision. it takes more than money and good intentions to improve lives which is something the last Labour government never got the credit for.
I remember the problems you had just walking around town in the 80s/90s when the Tory policys really started to hurt. this was probably the most visual change everyone should have noticed from the Tory government to the Labour government. you couldn't walk more than a few yrds from the ABC Limestreet without someone homeless stopping you and asking you for 10 or 20p. as Glenda Jackson said, shop doorways became the bedrooms for hundred of thousands of homeless people. that all disappeared for years but made a come back strongly as Glenda Jackson predicted (in local areas as councils clamped down) when the Torys took over again, the pandemic has hopefully forced change but I doubt it.

[Sangria]

A lot of those services came too late to help me but I always praised and defended the Labour MPs for having the intelligence to bring them in, they not only improved lives dramatically they also saved the country a fortune, I feel sorry for all those Labour MPs who did their best only to be vilified for every wrong decision. it takes more than money and good intentions to improve lives which is something the last Labour government never got the credit for.
I remember the problems you had just walking around town in the 80s/90s when the Tory policys really started to hurt. this was probably the most visual change everyone should have noticed from the Tory government to the Labour government. you couldn't walk more than a few yrds from the ABC Limestreet without someone homeless stopping you and asking you for 10 or 20p. as Glenda Jackson said, shop doorways became the bedrooms for hundred of thousands of homeless people. that all disappeared for years but made a come back strongly as Glenda Jackson predicted (in local areas as councils clamped down) when the Torys took over again, the pandemic has hopefully forced change but I doubt it.

Homeless charities said that the government gave them more than requested, immediate homelessness practically disappeared (reduced by something like 95%) and super-departments spanning multiple normal departments were set up to deal with the next goal of getting people long term housing. But all of that doesn't matter, because this overseas gentleman says Iraq and war criminal. All the good stuff we who live in Britain experienced under Labour doesn't matter, because this chap who doesn't live here says it doesn't matter, and that Iraq is more important than all these domestic improvements.

[Shankly998]

Going back to the original title its hard to say he's been anything other than a big disappointment so far when looking at opinion polling.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Going back to the original title its hard to say he's been anything other than a big disappointment so far when looking at opinion polling.

Exactly my thoughts

We have  a corrupt, contemptible government and he cant seem to land a glove on them

[jonnypb]

Exactly my thoughts

We have  a corrupt, contemptible government and he cant seem to land a glove on them

Which is extremely worrying 

[TepidT2O]

I corrected it one post later. And what he has been doing is challenging that one thing, which I corrected, and then claiming I'm saying things that I certainly am not saying and have not said!

Keir Starmer was a barrister in the 1990s, seemingly fighting good causes. Currently he seems to be cowing to the neoliberal, right wing of the party. Many of them Blairites from the 1990s admin. He has broken numerous promises and concessions made towards the left wing whilst campaigning as Corbyn's successor against Long Bailey.

Do you think Long Bailey would be more popular with the general public?

[petecolonia]

Do you think Long Bailey would be more popular with the general public?

I'm not sure - I didn't think Starmer would be as bad as he is either. She wasn't really ready, but may have grown into the role or not. The media would have been very, very hostile.

Now Starmer may secretly have lots of plans, but for now there is no evidence for that, he seems very slow to react and ineffective in opposition and mainly focussed on not rocking the boat. Leadbeater did a good job saving him with Batley & Spen, but that is exactly what she did.

[TepidT2O]

I consider Starmer to be for the left of the party….

Look up at his political history and it’s pretty much not Blairite

[petecolonia]

I consider Starmer to be for the left of the party….

Look up at his political history and it’s pretty much not Blairite

Yeah I said that a couple of posts back but currently he is very much acting like one. His treatment of Long Bailey and others, but especially Corbyn, has just been nothing short of disgraceful, and he has been shamefully slow and tame in challenging this government's incompetence. The opinion polls are crushing.

[TepidT2O]

Yeah I said that a couple of posts back but currently he is very much acting like one. His treatment of Long Bailey and others, but especially Corbyn, has just been nothing short of disgraceful, and he has been shamefully slow and tame in challenging this government's incompetence. The opinion polls are crushing.

I don’t think he had any option really.

Long Bailey was  especially stupid in the way she dealt with it and could easily have recanted.

And Corbyn?  All he has to do is apologise to the Jewish community.  I might ask why he isn’t prepared to do that.

[Sangria]

Did many people use the word Neoliberalism back in the 90s. I can't remember them doing it. Thatcherism seemed to be word used and understood back then which was easy enough to understand. I remember Corbyn using the word all the time when he became leader, had to look it up for a detailed explanation, never really got one.

The only people I regard as proper 1990s neoliberals are the economic theorists who advocated all kinds of economic liberalisations for Russia whose effects they deemed to be the necessary pain that their society would have to go through. That's the implementation of theories that we would later identify with what we'd later call neoliberalism, except they didn't have to face the consequences that they regard as necessary. Unlike some on the left, I don't throw the term around willy nilly to describe those whom I disagree with. I see it as a specific term covering a specific political philosophy.

[Sangria]

I don’t think he had any option really.

Long Bailey was  especially stupid in the way she dealt with it and could easily have recanted.

And Corbyn?  All he has to do is apologise to the Jewish community.  I might ask why he isn’t prepared to do that.

The answer is simple. I don't think Corbyn is (actively) anti-semitic. But he does think he is always right, backed by the texts he believes in. And since he is always right, he has nothing to apologise for.

Think of those not very bright members of the priesthood, who don't have much of a clue of world outside the priesthood, but who are well versed in the key texts of their religion. Suffering for their beliefs is part and parcel of their martyrdom, and to be welcomed. Recanting their beliefs, or opening their minds to a world outside their sacred texts, is not to be done.

[Yorkykopite]

Did many people use the word Neoliberalism back in the 90s. I can't remember them doing it. Thatcherism seemed to be word used and understood back then which was easy enough to understand. I remember Corbyn using the word all the time when he became leader, had to look it up for a detailed explanation, never really got one.

'Neoliberalism' is one of the most overused words in the political vocabulary of the left. Hardly anyone seems to able to define it though. In the hands of someone as unintelligent and incurious about economics as Corbyn it merely served as a stick to beat people he didn't like. It always got a cheer when Blair, say, was called a 'neo-liberal' - probably still does.

The same was true of the word 'socialism'. Corbyn spent his entire career demanding that the Labour party pursue 'socialist politics', without ever explaining what a socialist economy would look like and how it might function in a globalised world. The closest he came to defining socialism, certainly in his latter years, was when he said that Britain should emulate Venezuela. That was before the Venezuelan economy went into complete meltdown and hundreds of thousands of starving Venezuelans either rioted, died, or headed as refugees to neighbouring countries.   

[oldfordie]

The only people I regard as proper 1990s neoliberals are the economic theorists who advocated all kinds of economic liberalisations for Russia whose effects they deemed to be the necessary pain that their society would have to go through. That's the implementation of theories that we would later identify with what we'd later call neoliberalism, except they didn't have to face the consequences that they regard as necessary. Unlike some on the left, I don't throw the term around willy nilly to describe those whom I disagree with. I see it as a specific term covering a specific political philosophy.

Yeah I think I read it morphed into something else decades later which more about opinions in books rather than cold Thatcherism. am not going there. spending the night debating economic theories read in books is not for me, especially when I know they are a complete disaster for society, watching the darts final on TV is more exciting.

[petecolonia]

Corbyn didn't design economic policies though - and no he isn't great on theory.

On apologising to the Jewish community: he does not need to, he has done repeatedly, and Jews like me, Max Blumenthal, Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky, Michael Brooks think he never should have in the first place.

It was a smear campaign. It is the holocaust industry. It is conflating Jewishness with Israel. It is, itself, antisemitism. They should apologise to him.

[Sangria]

Yeah I think I read it morphed into something else decades later which more about opinions in books rather than cold Thatcherism. am not going there. spending the night debating economic theories read in books is not for me, especially when I know they are a complete disaster for society, watching the darts final on TV is more exciting.

I can't claim to really know what they were going on about. The salient fact why I despised them was how they espoused these theories for Russia and justified the pain Russia had to go through, whilst a safe distance away from the pain they said was necessary. I may or may not have had internationalist sympathies before then, but after them, I was against anyone preaching political ideals who did not have to live through the results of their preached theories. Hence I was against Blair in all his foreign adventures. Hence I have an issue with people living outside this country telling us what the Labour party should be.

[petecolonia]

The only people I regard as proper 1990s neoliberals are the economic theorists who advocated all kinds of economic liberalisations for Russia whose effects they deemed to be the necessary pain that their society would have to go through. That's the implementation of theories that we would later identify with what we'd later call neoliberalism, except they didn't have to face the consequences that they regard as necessary. Unlike some on the left, I don't throw the term around willy nilly to describe those whom I disagree with. I see it as a specific term covering a specific political philosophy.

That's weird, because Blair explicitly said that in many ways he was just building on Thatcher's policies. Thatcher was neoliberal to the core.

I'm sorry Sangria, but you're going to have to live with me having an opinion.

[TepidT2O]

Corbyn didn't design economic policies though - and no he isn't great on theory.

On apologising to the Jewish community: he does not need to, he has done repeatedly, and Jews like me, Max Blumenthal, Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky, Michael Brooks think he never should have in the first place.

It was a smear campaign. It is the holocaust industry. It is conflating Jewishness with Israel. It is, itself, antisemitism. They should apologise to him.

But it’s the condition a his re entry to the party.

I can accept some people don’t think he has anything to apologise for, we don’t all think the same, these are complex issues, fair enough.

What gets me is that given that this is his only condition for re entry, that he hasn’t done so.  I find that utterly bizarre.  Genuinely bizarre.  Words cost nothing, and even of I don’t think I’d done anything wrong, I’d still apologise if I felt people were offended.  Blows my mind why you wouldn’t do it.

Still, that’s why I could never be involved in politics I guess.

[nayia2002]

What is the actual point of stamer and labour at the moment??!!

Pathetic and useless 

[TepidT2O]

What is the actual point of stamer and labour at the moment??!!

Pathetic and useless 

Detoxifying the brand.  If he achieves that in the next three years, he’s done well.  (Sorry corbyn fans)

It’s been almost impossible with covid, it’s like being at war, people rally to the leadership.

[oldfordie]

I can't claim to really know what they were going on about. The salient fact why I despised them was how they espoused these theories for Russia and justified the pain Russia had to go through, whilst a safe distance away from the pain they said was necessary. I may or may not have had internationalist sympathies before then, but after them, I was against anyone preaching political ideals who did not have to live through the results of their preached theories. Hence I was against Blair in all his foreign adventures. Hence I have an issue with people living outside this country telling us what the Labour party should be.

Yeah, thats roughly what I was getting at. the words meaning morphed into something different over many years. ive never looked at the Russian interpretation which I assume is the first interpretation of the word.
I was more interested in clarifying what the word meant first and whether accusing Labour MPs of supporting Neoliberalism/Thatcherism is justified.

[Snail]

Detoxifying the brand.  If he achieves that in the next three years, he’s done well.  (Sorry corbyn fans)

We’re shit. Any of you who voted for us in 2017 and 2019 are idiots, we don’t want your woke nonsense anymore, fuck off. Hi, man/woman with a vaguely Northern accent with a considerable property portfolio, you seem to know what you’re talking about. You voted Labour once in 1997 and you’ve never voted for Labour again since? Why, that was almost a quarter of a century ago! You’re just the sort of ex-Labour voter we need. Please, tell us what you want from us. Sorry, you’ll have to excuse me, there’s a 32 year old on a zero hours contract who can barely afford their rent trying to - oh god, what do you want? No, you can’t have that, our focus groups have said it would go down badly in the red wall. Hi, sorry Neil, what were you saying again? Ah, yes, some people say that young people are lazy c*nts but we couldn’t possibly… heh heh yes, I can see why you might think that. Labour does not stand for discrimination. Sorry, there’s a trans kid screaming in the background… Rosie, Jess, can you take them away please? Fucking freaks. Sorry about that. Labour does not stand for discrimination. We hear your concerns about the Asian community and we agree that Islam is definitely problematic, and homophobic, which is everything we are not. The Labour Party does not stand for discrimination, but please consider the feelings of people who… kind of agree with discrimination. And statues have feelings too. Labour were complete and utter shit between 2015 and 2019, but now we’re good. Vote for us. Except you. God, and you. And you. We don’t need you.

Ah god Neil, you promised me you’d vote Labour, but you went and voted Conservative anyway. I don’t understand.

[Sangria]

We’re shit. Any of you who voted for us in 2017 and 2019 are idiots, we don’t want your woke nonsense anymore, fuck off. Hi, man/woman with a vaguely Northern accent with a considerable property portfolio, you seem to know what you’re talking about. You voted Labour once in 1997 and you’ve never voted for Labour again since? Why, that was almost a quarter of a century ago! You’re just the sort of ex-Labour voter we need. Please, tell us what you want from us. Sorry, you’ll have to excuse me, there’s a 32 year old on a zero hours contract who can barely afford their rent trying to - oh god, what do you want? No, you can’t have that, our focus groups have said it would go down badly in the red wall. Hi, sorry Neil, what were you saying again? Ah, yes, some people say that young people are lazy c*nts but we couldn’t possibly… heh heh yes, I can see why you might think that. Labour does not stand for discrimination. Sorry, there’s a trans kid screaming in the background… Rosie, Jess, can you take them away please? Fucking freaks. Sorry about that. Labour does not stand for discrimination. We hear your concerns about the Asian community and we agree that Islam is definitely problematic, and homophobic, which is everything we are not. The Labour Party does not stand for discrimination, but please consider the feelings of people who… kind of agree with discrimination. And statues have feelings too. Labour were complete and utter shit between 2015 and 2019, but now we’re good. Vote for us. Except you. God, and you. And you. We don’t need you.

Ah god Neil, you promised me you’d vote Labour, but you went and voted Conservative anyway. I don’t understand.

What do you make of those Corbyn cheerleaders like Novara Media who supported Galloway in the recent by-election? Do you think Labour should try to get them back?

[Snail]

What do you make of those Corbyn cheerleaders like Novara Media who supported Galloway in the recent by-election? Do you think Labour should try to get them back?

Novara are dickheads and Galloway is a c*nt. Over to you.

[TepidT2O]

Novara are dickheads and Galloway is a c*nt. Over to you.

[Sangria]

Let’s get this straight, Novara are dickheads and Sangria brought them and Galloway up as a weird response to my post which came across a little bit like deflection. I don’t think anyone should be trying to defend the professional grifters within Novara, and certainly not the nasty piece of work that is Galloway.

For what it’s worth I think Owen Jones is not nearly as left wing as the centrist dads think he is, but I feel for him when he’s getting compared to fascists considering he’s actually been battered by fascists in the past for being left wing, and gay. The fixation on him is weird, I feel like he argues in good faith at least some of the time, which I’ve never seen Sangria do in the decade I’ve been on here.

It's my point that the Corbyn loyalists get much of their material from social media, readily identifiable by their use of certain memes (eg. chicken coup, "Keith", etc.). Also identifiable by their stream of consciousness use of terms that make no objective sense when you look at it as an argument, but have their own meanings when used within their circles as a reinforcement of their identity. See the accusation of Starmer of being literally a 1990s neoliberal; inaccurate in every single detail, but makes sense when you look at the words in their contextual meaning, of reinforcing the user's identity as being opposed to all things non-Corbyn.

Novara Media, Canary, Momentum, the rest of that lot are the drivers of this social media left wing movement. Since you evidently identify with that movement (repeating most of the points of that movement), I asked you what you thought of the social media drivers of it. You've stated that you think that Novara are grifters. What do you think of the other media, such as Canary, Momentum, et al?

And BTW, I'd like to know why you think I argue in bad faith. I never ask a question I would not answer myself. I'd have thought that was the epitome of good faith. And how would you relate your idea of good faith with the post I replied to, where you wrote a lengthy paragraph of how the Labour leadership are abandoning people like you? To use my standards of good faith, what kind of response to that post would you regard as being in good faith?

[Yorkykopite]

This is decent representation of Starmer and why he's so useless. The fence sitting and seeking to appease literally everyone at every turn just comes across as insipid.

Especially when you're up against a PM and a govt that will very happily take up a position. Even if it means reneging on it in the future, at least they look decisive.

If he'd just supported Butler on what she'd said and not saught to appear to also encourage only playing by the rules and being polite and palatable, would anything have been lost?

So weak.

Here's the key quote:

Sir Keir added: "In fairness to the temporary speaker, Judith Cummings, who was there, she did the right thing, she followed the rules because parliament doesn't allow you to call other parliamentarians liars in the chamber, so I don't criticise the speaker ... the deputy speaker for what she did, she was following the rules. But do I support Dawn in what she said? I absolutely do."

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-dawn-butler-right-to-call-boris-johnson-a-liar-in-commons-sir-keir-starmer-says-12364485

Some minds will not be able to cope with the contradiction in what he said. But most sensible people will I think. In fact it ought to be very easy.

[Red-Soldier]

Here's the key quote:

Sir Keir added: "In fairness to the temporary speaker, Judith Cummings, who was there, she did the right thing, she followed the rules because parliament doesn't allow you to call other parliamentarians liars in the chamber, so I don't criticise the speaker ... the deputy speaker for what she did, she was following the rules. But do I support Dawn in what she said? I absolutely do."

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-dawn-butler-right-to-call-boris-johnson-a-liar-in-commons-sir-keir-starmer-says-12364485

Some minds will not be able to cope with the contradiction in what he said. But most sensible people will I think. In fact it ought to be very easy.

Yep.  It's quite easy to acknowledge the rules, as well as agreeing with Butler.

[has gone odd]

He seems okay, though its easy being okay when your contemporaries are pure unadulterated shite.

Seems a bit passive though, needs more character for the win.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

This is decent representation of Starmer and why he's so useless. The fence sitting and seeking to appease literally everyone at every turn just comes across as insipid.

Especially when you're up against a PM and a govt that will very happily take up a position. Even if it means reneging on it in the future, at least they look decisive.

If he'd just supported Butler on what she'd said and not saught to appear to also encourage only playing by the rules and being polite and palatable, would anything have been lost?

So weak.

Fence sitting? Not sure I understand your reasoning?

[Elmo!]

Yeah it seems pretty obvious to me what Starmer meant there, and it isn't fence sitting.

[TepidT2O]

Think it’s also fair to say that all of the media headlines on Starmer’s comments regarding Butler are leading with him backing her, so even though I do believe fence-sitting is something that the Tories are going to try and use against him, there hasn’t been an issue with that in this particular instance.

I think he’s right though.

Her comments were correct, but so was the speaker.
The speaker has to follow the rules laid down, it would be terribly unfair if they didn’t.  And the speaker also cannot be the one to tell the tories that they are lying.  The truth is very often subjective, and the speaker would then become the arbiter of what is “truth”.  This is not and never has been the  speakers job and would end up making an apolitical role essentially quite political.  I also think it’s correct that you can’t just call someone a liar in Parliament.  Whilst I agree with every word of what Butler said, if we allowed people to use the term, MPs would just end up with reductive arguments where everyone just ends up calling everyone else a liar. As a rule I think we all agree that we want a higher level of debate in Parliament, so I think for that reason, it is right for the rule to stand.

[TepidT2O]

Yes, I agree. My post was about how Starmer is perceived for such comments. There is definitely a push from those opposed to him (and that would include both the far-left and the Tory Party) to characterise him as a fence-sitter, but it’s important to recognise that the key part of his quote and what the media is leading with is that Butler has his support for making those comments. He’s careful not to start questioning the process that removed Butler from the session but is basically saying “Yes, the Prime Minister does lie a lot and it did need to be said”. For all of my reservations on him, I think he’s played this one well.

I have reservations… but I also think he’s a really decent human being.  For that, I wish him well.

[oldfordie]

Here's the key quote:

Sir Keir added: "In fairness to the temporary speaker, Judith Cummings, who was there, she did the right thing, she followed the rules because parliament doesn't allow you to call other parliamentarians liars in the chamber, so I don't criticise the speaker ... the deputy speaker for what she did, she was following the rules. But do I support Dawn in what she said? I absolutely do."

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-dawn-butler-right-to-call-boris-johnson-a-liar-in-commons-sir-keir-starmer-says-12364485

Some minds will not be able to cope with the contradiction in what he said. But most sensible people will I think. In fact it ought to be very easy.

It's the smart move as well. he's taken away the right wing medias chance of turning the incident into Starmer being a irresponsible leader, the Labour party is more interested in gesture politics than bringing the country together, how Starmer should respect our democratic process, what next Starmer, another referendum blah blah blah.

[petecolonia]

he's a barrister, even I agree with that statement if it really is against parliamentary rules, but also much power to Dawn!

[thaddeus]

It's the smart move as well. he's taken away the right wing medias chance of turning the incident into Starmer being a irresponsible leader, the Labour party is more interested in gesture politics than bringing the country together, how Starmer should respect our democratic process, what next Starmer, another referendum blah blah blah.

Dawn Butler has done what I wish a lot more of the opposition would do in calling out the behaviour of this government and Johnson both individually and as the figureheads of the government.  Starmer can then retain his position as measured and reasoned while still supporting his MPs and their views.  Ed Milliband taking Johnson to task over Brexit and leaving Johnson looking like a lost child is another good recent example.

It's undoubtedly frustrating at times watching Starmer trying to take the high road while Johnson apes around in front of him and delivers all his well rehearsed soundbites.  I really don't think it would do Starmer or Labour any favours though if he lowered himself to Johnson's level.  Those people that like Johnson for his obnoxious and perceived anti-establishment behaviour aren't going to suddenly fall in behind Starmer because he's mimicking him.