Topic: Keir Starmer: your views?

[Yorkykopite]

You can print things off that appear on the Internet and rip them up, ask one of your grandchildren to do it for you x

Cheers I will do. But it seems like a bit a palaver just so I can tear the thing up. Not very green either.

[stewil007]

Cheers I will do. But it seems like a bit a palaver just so I can tear the thing up. Not very green either.

Set your printer to black and white print only

[Yorkykopite]

Set your printer to black and white print only

Why white?

[classycarra]

You can print things off that appear on the Internet and rip them up, ask one of your grandchildren to do it for you x

You're here without new polling results?

Did a memo go out? Or is it like a Candyman thing with Keir Starmer (x3)?

[Wild Romany Boy]

You're here without new polling results?

Did a memo go out? Or is it like a Candyman thing with Keir Starmer (x3)?

At the risk of doing a Yorky, wouldn't they be here all the time, in the Keir Starmer thread, if that's what brings him to the forums?

[classycarra]

At the risk of doing a Yorky, wouldn't they be here all the time, in the Keir Starmer thread, if that's what brings him to the forums?

Mate, my shit joke is barely worth reading let alone analysing!

[stewil007]

Why white?

Touche

[Elmo!]

The section about the SNP is certainly being treated with the contempt that it deserves.

When is he and Labour going to learn that insulting those he is supposedly trying to win over isn't a great strategy?

[Yorkykopite]

The section about the SNP is certainly being treated with the contempt that it deserves.

When is he and Labour going to learn that insulting those he is supposedly trying to win over isn't a great strategy?

A wee bit touchy there Elmo. No insults were thrown so far as I can see.

Labour and the SNP are rival parties and Scotland obviously cannot be reduced to the SNP. It's perfectly legitimate to have a go at the record of an SNP government, and that's all Starmer does. He has a go at the Conservative government too. I wouldn't expect anything less of a Labour leader.

[Elmo!]

A wee bit touchy there Elmo. No insults were thrown so far as I can see.

Labour and the SNP are rival parties and Scotland obviously cannot be reduced to the SNP. It's perfectly legitimate to have a go at the record of an SNP government, and that's all Starmer does. He has a go at the Conservative government too. I wouldn't expect anything less of a Labour leader.

What was touchy about it Yorky? Honestly I'm genuinely not arsed in the slightest.

[Yorkykopite]

What was touchy about it Yorky?

Assuming valid criticism of the SNP is insulting.

And perhaps even inferring (from the criticism) that he was attacking Scotland and not the SNP.

[Elmo!]

Assuming valid criticism of the SNP is insulting.

And perhaps even inferring (from the criticism) that he was attacking Scotland and not the SNP.

I didnt' mention Scotland.

[Elmo!]

Anyway I am off to the pub and then out for a meal. I might flesh out a bit what I mean later.

[Yorkykopite]

I didnt' mention Scotland.

No you didn't. I was trying to be kind to you. I couldn't imagine why anyone would find Starmer's comments about the SNP insulting and supposed you'd misread them as comments about Scottish people (a confusion slightly suggested by your insistence that Starmer's "insults" would never persuade Scottish voters to return to Labour).

Enjoy your meal!

[Wild Romany Boy]

Anyway I am off to the pub and then out for a meal. I might flesh out a bit what I mean later.

Don't see any need myself. I got what you meant, or think I did, at least.

They haven't had a decent plan for Scotland in at least 7 years to be honest, and probably longer given the mess that has been made of it all.

[Elmo!]

No you didn't. I was trying to be kind to you. I couldn't imagine why anyone would find Starmer's comments about the SNP insulting and supposed you'd misread them as comments about Scottish people (a confusion slightly suggested by your insistence that Starmer's "insults" would never persuade Scottish voters to return to Labour).

Enjoy your meal!

So hands up, I haven't read the whole essay, I haven't had the time franky, even if I wanted to. I saw this excerpt.



This refusal to acknowledge any of the issues independence supporters have and just say you are the same as Tories. That is insulting, and frankly anyone who has actually spent time here would know that.

Look at the shitshow this country has become. Just the barest acknowledgement that we may just have a little bit of a point. And then actually come up with some ideas on how you plan to address the issues we have.

Regardless if you agree, if he genuinely wants to win back Scotland, this is absolutely not the way.

[Yorkykopite]

So hands up, I haven't read the whole essay, I haven't had the time franky, even if I wanted to. I saw this excerpt.



This refusal to acknowledge any of the issues independence supporters have and just say you are the same as Tories. That is insulting, and frankly anyone who has actually spent time here would know that.

Look at the shitshow this country has become. Just the barest acknowledgement that we may just have a little bit of a point. And then actually come up with some ideas on how you plan to address the issues we have.

Regardless if you agree, if he genuinely wants to win back Scotland, this is absolutely not the way.

Thanks for replying and showing me the bit that upset you.

I don't agree with you that it's insulting, but then again I have never voted for the SNP. I'm sure that Tories will be 'insulted' by his criticisms too. This is party politics. Partisans have thin skins.

The previous leader of the Labour party soft-pedalled on the SNP - partly no doubt because he was in sympathy with any group that disliked the Union, and partly because he couldn't bring himself to criticise any political force that, by reputation at least, was anti-austerity. It didn't do the Labour party any good at all. No self-respecting Scot was ever going to start voting for the Labour party when it cringed like that.

Starmer's choice, by contrast, is clearly to go on the offensive. He is a Unionist and that explains some of it. But he also senses that the SNP might be vulnerable to attack from the Left (Gordon Brown rather effectively put the boot in last week too).

I realise this line of attack might be a bit of a shock. But surely you can't keep calling it "insulting".

Is it effective? Perhaps you are right, and it will be counter-productive.  Then again, maybe the time is right for the SNP to get a bit of a boot. We'll see. 

PS He didn't say that the SNP and the Tories were "the same" he said their politics were "symbiotic". That is a very different thing. Hopefully, this will be understood by most Scots. Perhaps he should have not used such an obscure word. It would be unfortunate if others also misunderstood and were insulted as a result.

[Elmo!]

Thanks for replying and showing me the bit that upset you.

I don't agree with you that it's insulting, but then again I have never voted for the SNP. I'm sure that Tories will be 'insulted' by his criticisms too. This is party politics. Partisans have thin skins.

The previous leader of the Labour party soft-pedalled on the SNP - partly no doubt because he was in sympathy with any group that disliked the Union, and partly because he couldn't bring himself to criticise any political force that, by reputation at least, was anti-austerity. It didn't do the Labour party any good at all. No self-respecting Scot was ever going to start voting for the Labour party when it cringed like that.

Starmer's choice, by contrast, is clearly to go on the offensive. He is a Unionist and that explains some of it. But he also senses that the SNP might be vulnerable to attack from the Left (Gordon Brown rather effectively put the boot in last week too).

I realise this line of attack might be a bit of a shock. But surely you can't keep calling it "insulting".

Is it effective? Perhaps you are right, and it will be counter-productive.  Then again, maybe the time is right for the SNP to get a bit of a boot. We'll see.

Did he?
 

I hate to break it to you Yorky, but Broony is a laughing stock in Scotland these days.

[Yorkykopite]

Did he?
 

I hate to break it to you Yorky, but Broony is a laughing stock in Scotland these days.

He shouldn't be. But perhaps that's the way things are going in Scotland still. I hope for your sakes it isn't.

[Elmo!]

He shouldn't be. But perhaps that's the way things are going in Scotland still. I hope for your sakes it isn't.

Honestly, I think it is revealing the difference in what you are seeing to what is happening up here.

Gordon Brown lost all credibility in Scotland when he lied to the pensioners. When he promised near-fedralism, then spent the last 7 years trying to claim he didn't.

He is a spent force. He may still carry some political weight down south, but he is a parody, a laughing stock now.

[Sangria]

So hands up, I haven't read the whole essay, I haven't had the time franky, even if I wanted to. I saw this excerpt.



This refusal to acknowledge any of the issues independence supporters have and just say you are the same as Tories. That is insulting, and frankly anyone who has actually spent time here would know that.

Look at the shitshow this country has become. Just the barest acknowledgement that we may just have a little bit of a point. And then actually come up with some ideas on how you plan to address the issues we have.

Regardless if you agree, if he genuinely wants to win back Scotland, this is absolutely not the way.

So what, other than independence, addresses the issues you refer to? What are the issues you talk about, and what can be done now to address them?

[Yorkykopite]

Honestly, I think it is revealing the difference in what you are seeing to what is happening up here.

Gordon Brown lost all credibility in Scotland when he lied to the pensioners. When he promised near-fedralism, then spent the last 7 years trying to claim he didn't.

He is a spent force. He may still carry some political weight down south, but he is a parody, a laughing stock now.

OK. I'll defer to you on that one.

But I hope you now accept that Starmer did not argue in his essay that the Tories and the SNP were the "same"; merely that their politics were "symbiotic". A very different thing. Hence no need to be insulted.

[Elmo!]

OK. I'll defer to you on that one.

But I hope you now accept that Starmer did not argue in his essay that the Tories and the SNP were the "same"; merely that their politics were "symbiotic". A very different thing. Hence no need to be insulted.

It's insulting to boil it down to suggest we use nationalism to freely whip up fear. It's insulting to suggest we create division. That is not what the SNP is about. (To be clear I am not an SNP member as I have said before. My politics sit somewhere between the SNP,  the Scottish Greens and Labour).  It's insulting, and frankly childish to try and trivially try and suggest that the Scottish independence supporters are the exact same as all the worst nationalist movements. It fundamentally isn't (of course with any movement there are fringe elements).

The core indy movement is progressive, pro-immigration (unlike Labour a lot of the time), unequivocally pro-EU (unlike Labour a lot of the time) and outward looking.

[Zeb]

Where there is an interesting contrast between SNP and Tory voters in how Starmer addresses them, and we're obviously not talking critiques of a governing party here, is that there's an acknowledgement for why voters switched to the Tories from Labour. There's nothing there for the Scots who went Labour to SNP. I think in some ways that speaks to the priorities of the next election. That need to retain and claw back English seats which is going to be a driven by messaging directly to 2019 English Tory voters (we're seeing the idea that there's a horde of lefty non-voters just waiting to be motivated to turn out being truly buried by recent research, and there's some very mildly encouraging signs in the detailed polling by seat type of Labour looking like they'll be 30 or so seats up on 2019 if things remain just as they are although that's still 30 short on undoing 2019). Partly why I'm thinking Starmer and his team are looking at incremental steps over several years here as a Labour government is going to be their aim and that ultimately has to mean winning Scottish seats unless there's a major shift in a number of very safe Tory seats. Of course, it also allows for decisions to be taken on how things look following the next election.

[Yorkykopite]

It's insulting to boil it down to suggest we use nationalism to freely whip up fear. It's insulting to suggest we create division. That is not what the SNP is about. (To be clear I am not an SNP member as I have said before. My politics sit somewhere between the SNP,  the Scottish Greens and Labour).  It's insulting, and frankly childish to try and trivially try and suggest that the Scottish independence supporters are the exact same as all the worst nationalist movements. It fundamentally isn't (of course with any movement there are fringe elements).

The core indy movement is progressive, pro-immigration (unlike Labour a lot of the time), unequivocally pro-EU (unlike Labour a lot of the time) and outward looking.

Fair enough. Although you do keep shifting the goalposts over why you're insulted!

For what it's worth I found Starmer's essay grey, shallow and badly written. But I'm astonished anyone was insulted.

Although people seem to get insulted all the time now, so maybe "astonished" is not the right word.

[Sangria]

It's insulting to boil it down to suggest we use nationalism to freely whip up fear. It's insulting to suggest we create division. That is not what the SNP is about. (To be clear I am not an SNP member as I have said before. My politics sit somewhere between the SNP,  the Scottish Greens and Labour).  It's insulting, and frankly childish to try and trivially try and suggest that the Scottish independence supporters are the exact same as all the worst nationalist movements. It fundamentally isn't (of course with any movement there are fringe elements).

The core indy movement is progressive, pro-immigration (unlike Labour a lot of the time), unequivocally pro-EU (unlike Labour a lot of the time) and outward looking.

Labour would be all of these things if it could (see the last Labour government). But the electorate would permanently vote in the Tories. So it has to compromise where it can, so it can win power and do something.

[Elmo!]

Labour would be all of these things if it could (see the last Labour government). But the electorate would permanently vote in the Tories. So it has to compromise where it can, so it can win power and do something.

Well can you see why it gets a bit annoying up here? 

[Sangria]

Where there is an interesting contrast between SNP and Tory voters in how Starmer addresses them, and we're obviously not talking critiques of a governing party here, is that there's an acknowledgement for why voters switched to the Tories from Labour. There's nothing there for the Scots who went Labour to SNP. I think in some ways that speaks to the priorities of the next election. That need to retain and claw back English seats which is going to be a driven by messaging directly to 2019 English Tory voters (we're seeing the idea that there's a horde of lefty non-voters just waiting to be motivated to turn out being truly buried by recent research, and there's some very mildly encouraging signs in the detailed polling by seat type of Labour looking like they'll be 30 or so seats up on 2019 if things remain just as they are although that's still 30 short on undoing 2019). Partly why I'm thinking Starmer and his team are looking at incremental steps over several years here as a Labour government is going to be their aim and that ultimately has to mean winning Scottish seats unless there's a major shift in a number of very safe Tory seats. Of course, it also allows for decisions to be taken on how things look following the next election.

If there's a way for Scottish Labour to be all the things Elmo talks about, without it adversely affecting Labour in England and Wales, then they should. However, if the issue is unionism, and nothing short of independence will satisfy, then I'm not sure if there's room for compromise.

[Sangria]

Well can you see why it gets a bit annoying up here? 

So what solution would you propose? I've received lots of criticism for describing the schism between factions in the Labour party, but I've also given concrete proposals for squaring the circle, which are realistic enough that they're practically identical to what current and former Labour MPs in the red wall say should be done. What would you say are the issues facing Scottish Labour, and what do you suggest should be done to address them?

[Elmo!]

Fair enough. Although you do keep shifting the goalposts over why you're insulted!

For what it's worth I found Starmer's essay grey, shallow and badly written. But I'm astonished anyone was insulted.

Although people seem to get insulted all the time now, so maybe "astonished" is not the right word.

I suppose to be fair, my general complaint is towards the Labour party over the years, rather than the specific words in this excerpt. It's just yet again we have another leader who just doesn't get it and resorty to infantile arguments that have never shown any sign of working.

As much as anything, politics aside, on a pure pragmatic level it reveals his severe limitations if he can't see that.

I'm not an ideological indy supporter. If I believed genuine change was realistically possible in my lifetime as part of the UK I could well change my mind. But time after time, the only party that has any realistic chance of doing anything and winning power just fails to grasp what is needed, or treat the complaints many of us have seriously.

(It would probably take PR and scrapping of HoL at a bare minimum to change my mind).

[Elmo!]

So what solution would you propose? I've received lots of criticism for describing the schism between factions in the Labour party, but I've also given concrete proposals for squaring the circle, which are realistic enough that they're practically identical to what current and former Labour MPs in the red wall say should be done. What would you say are the issues facing Scottish Labour, and what do you suggest should be done to address them?

Competence is the number one issue. Just the slightest hint of it's existence would be a start.

[Sangria]

I suppose to be fair, my general complaint is towards the Labour party over the years, rather than the specific words in this excerpt. It's just yet again we have another leader who just doesn't get it and resorty to infantile arguments that have never shown any sign of working.

As much as anything, politics aside, on a pure pragmatic level it reveals his severe limitations if he can't see that.

I'm not an ideological indy supporter. If I believed genuine change was realistically possible in my lifetime as part of the UK I could well change my mind. But time after time, the only party that has any realistic chance of doing anything and winning power just fails to grasp what is needed, or treat the complaints many of us have seriously.

(It would probably take PR and scrapping of HoL at a bare minimum to change my mind).

Why scrap the HoL when, in practice, it has done more to block the worst of the Tory governments' actions than the HoC?

[Zeb]

If there's a way for Scottish Labour to be all the things Elmo talks about, without it adversely affecting Labour in England and Wales, then they should. However, if the issue is unionism, and nothing short of independence will satisfy, then I'm not sure if there's room for compromise.

Sorry, maybe I'm not expressing myself well tonight as my head's a bit fuzzy, but set that aside a moment as Scottish Labour and Welsh Labour having their own messaging (and policies at times). Starmer does talk about nationalism and gives a (clumsy but we all know what he's trying to distinguish between) left wing critique of nationalism becoming a prop to cover over failures in government. But what he doesn't do is actually address why people are moving towards that, nor how the politics of the SNP has changed over the years. Contrast with the acknowledgement that the Tories did change under Cameron, did present a different face, did make themselves presentable to the electorate etc.

[Elmo!]

Why scrap the HoL when, in practice, it has done more to block the worst of the Tory governments' actions than the HoC?

Shit things do good occasionally. It's fundamentally undemocratic, and the odd good turn doesn't change that.

[Sangria]

Competence is the number one issue. Just the slightest hint of it's existence would be a start.

Would centrally appointed technocrats be better than locally elected incompetents? Eg. Liverpool.

[Sangria]

Shit things do good occasionally. It's fundamentally undemocratic, and the odd good turn doesn't change that.

As I've stated in previous pages, with the electorate we have, how is democracy a fundamentally reliable principle in ensuring competent government? See the mayoralty of Liverpool. Over the past decade, the Commons has failed progressivism over and over, while the Lords has defended the checks and balances.

[Elmo!]

As I've stated in previous pages, with the electorate we have, how is democracy a fundamentally reliable principle in ensuring competent government? See the mayoralty of Liverpool. Over the past decade, the Commons has failed progressivism over and over, while the Lords has defended the checks and balances.

See comments on PR.

[Sangria]

Sorry, maybe I'm not expressing myself well tonight as my head's a bit fuzzy, but set that aside a moment as Scottish Labour and Welsh Labour having their own messaging (and policies at times). Starmer does talk about nationalism and gives a (clumsy but we all know what he's trying to distinguish between) left wing critique of nationalism becoming a prop to cover over failures in government. But what he doesn't do is actually address why people are moving towards that, nor how the politics of the SNP has changed over the years. Contrast with the acknowledgement that the Tories did change under Cameron, did present a different face, did make themselves presentable to the electorate etc.

My take, as an Englander, is that I'd like progressivism to take another look and win another chance. But without the more leftward tendency of Scotland, there isn't much chance of us in England seeing that in my lifetime. I agree with all the things Elmo said about what he'd like Labour to be in Scotland. But we in England need Scotland, to even have the chance to be delivered from the Tories.

[Sangria]

See comments on PR.

Could you expand? I've not been following the debate on PR, how it works out in practice with the UK electorate, and in particular how it relates to the HoL.

[John C]

As I've stated in previous pages, with the electorate we have, how is democracy a fundamentally reliable principle in ensuring competent government? See the mayoralty of Liverpool. Over the past decade, the Commons has failed progressivism over and over, while the Lords has defended the checks and balances.

Local Government or MP's?
I'm not sure what your point is mate?