General British politics discussion thread

Lemming

Nody wrote: »

He could gone after NHS raises; that would play well out (our brave nurses on the front line deserve the credit etc. to steal thunder from Boris). He could go after Boris on the corruption in government and ask why all his buddies ended up with multi million contracts that were not disclosed pointing out that money could have gone to struggling businesses/lower taxes/NHS. He could have called out the lack of support for businesses hit by Brexit and Covid and present a plan how he'd support it further. He could have gone after the abysmal support for truck drivers and not getting a fair deal for them and how the truck parking lots are running over will of the people etc.

Almost every one of those talking points would be dismissed - with exceeding predictability - by the Tories with words like "covid", "unforseen", "dire times", "unprecedented national emergency". The press would lap it up, and tbh, unless Labour had a smoking gun AND video footage for evidence, it would be very difficult to gain any sort of traction against those predictable, vapid soundbites because of the "rally round the flag in times of emergency" mindset that gives vast swathes of the population (and media) unquestioning deference to the government.

The only one that could gain traction was the NHS pay raises. Embarassing? Absolultey, but not exactly ammunition with which to deliver a coup de grace against the Tory government

The difficulty for any of the opposition is that the Tories are hiding behind Covid. Until that abates, it's time to play the waiting game unfortunately.

Leroy42

Lemming wrote: »

Almost every one of those talking points would be dismissed - with exceeding predictability - by the Tories with words like "covid", "unforseen", "dire times", "unprecedented national emergency". The press would lap it up, and tbh, unless Labour had a smoking gun AND video footage for evidence, it would be very difficult to gain any sort of traction against those predictable, vapid soundbites because of the "rally round the flag in times of emergency" mindset that gives vast swathes of the population (and media) unquestioning deference to the government.

The only one that could gain traction was the NHS pay raises. Embarassing? Absolultey, but not exactly ammunition with which to deliver a coup de grace against the Tory government

The difficulty for any of the opposition is that the Tories are hiding behind Covid. Until that abates, it's time to play the waiting game unfortunately.

I agree that there won't be a gotcha moment, or a moment the press go 'hold on a minute Johnson is useless' but the continued pressure, the constant questions, using their last answer against them wears them all down.

Johnson doesn't do detail, he also doesn't seem to care what he says from one week to the next, so force him, and his cabinet, to take positions and then use that against them.

Its a long term game for sure, but over time ir wears the Tories out.

breezy1985

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I'm saying it's telling because they're not in parliament so it just goes to show the lack of quality that is sitting on the opposition benches right now. Both would have to get themselves elected before they could launch a leadership bid so thats not entirely straightforward. If Starmer didn't last the course for some reason, very unlikely but you never know, then i honestly don't know who they'd come up with.

They are being talked about because they are popular accomplished politicans. Neither is actually talking about running for the jobs are they it's talk. And if they did want to run they would be elected easily just like Johnson was not long ago. Khan would be a shoo in in London

I think maybe you are just trying hard to find "telling" things

PommieBast

Lemming wrote: »

The only one that could gain traction was the NHS pay raises. Embarassing? Absolultey, but not exactly ammunition with which to deliver a coup de grace against the Tory government

Calling for public-sector pay increases was pretty much Labour's entire 2015 campaign and a good portion of the subsequent Corbynism, so even with Covid-19 it will sound like a broken record to a lot of people.

Joe_ Public

breezy1985 wrote: »

They are being talked about because they are popular accomplished politicans. Neither is actually talking about running for the jobs are they it's talk. And if they did want to run they would be elected easily just like Johnson was not long ago. Khan would be a shoo in in London

I think maybe you are just trying hard to find "telling" things

Maybe i am. Though i don't know where i said or hinted that neither Burnham nor Khan werent accomplished politicians. Not really sure where you're picking that up tbh.

breezy1985

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Maybe i am. Though i don't know where i said or hinted that neither Burnham nor Khan werent accomplished politicians. Not really sure where you're picking that up tbh.

I am just saying that is why their names pop up in conversation about top Labour politicians. He is not an MP but the mayor of London is probably more high profile and more important than 75% of MPs of any party in parliament

ancapailldorcha

I think the big problem Starmer faces is that he's opposing a nationalistic government which has been forced by the pandemic to adopt social democratic policies. Since they're doing what Starmer would most likely have done to manage the pandemic, minus the handwringing over statues and the like, then there's not much criticism he can really offer. Angela Merkel did the same to the centre-left SPD in Germany fifteen years ago when she nicked their policies and they withered as a result.

It's tough being the leader of the opposition but it's on him to be visible and he is the leader at the end of the day. He ran for the job and got it. He's had a year now and while most of this can be pinned on covid, he really needs to present a vision for the country instead of vacuous rabbitting on about rewarding long term savers or whatever.

breezy1985

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think the big problem Starmer faces is that he's opposing a nationalistic government which has been forced by the pandemic to adopt social democratic policies. Since they're doing what Starmer would most likely have done to manage the pandemic, minus the handwringing over statues and the like, then there's not much criticism he can really offer. Angela Merkel did the same to the centre-left SPD in Germany fifteen years ago when she nicked their policies and they withered as a result.

It's tough being the leader of the opposition but it's on him to be visible and he is the leader at the end of the day. He ran for the job and got it. He's had a year now and while most of this can be pinned on covid, he really needs to present a vision for the country instead of vacuous rabbitting on about rewarding long term savers or whatever.

I think he will have to wait till after the pandemic and then the proper reviews will start. If they are smart they will remind people of the early days when Johnson believed in herd immunity or told people "go to the pub but dont go to the pub but go to the pub" and also all the money wasted and thrown to his buddies during the pandemic. Covid is also masking all the money Brexit is losing for Britain

Tom Mann Centuria

He's abstained like a champ. Thought he was weak before elected as leader but hoped he'd be true to his word about being a unifying choice. Well he hasn't even tried, he's atrocious.

If Labour hold Hartlepool he can maybe use that and say it's the first sign he's shoring up the red wall. Fukcing humungous IF though.

Nody

PommieBast wrote: »

Calling for public-sector pay increases was pretty much Labour's entire 2015 campaign and a good portion of the subsequent Corbynism, so even with Covid-19 it will sound like a broken record to a lot of people.

And talking about the "good old times" and "having more British flags" is what, a brand new bold strategy to swing Labour back into power? Labour will never win trying to be Tory squared; Labour need to actually offer a reason to vote on them that's not "We're more tory than the tories" and Starmer has completely failed to offer such vision. That's a leadership problem; not a covid problem. Heck he could talk about how he'd nationalize the rail again (popular opinion) or his multibillion non London spend (popular in the area Labour lost) to upskill and get manufacturing back etc. There are a ton of options out there; yet he went for keeping his mouth shut, refuse to call out Boris on anything and pretend he's a Tory.

As for a smoking gun on Tories lying? How about the High court ruling? Keep hammering it in parliament, in interviews etc. to home in on the point but no, instead Starmer sits back and wants more flags and nationalism.

Professor Moriarty

Nody wrote: »

And talking about the "good old times" and "having more British flags" is what, a brand new bold strategy to swing Labour back into power? Labour will never win trying to be Tory squared; Labour need to actually offer a reason to vote on them that's not "We're more tory than the tories" and Starmer has completely failed to offer such vision. That's a leadership problem; not a covid problem.

As for a smoking gun on Tories lying? How about the High court ruling? Keep hammering it in parliament, in interviews etc. to home in on the point but no, instead Starmer sits back and wants more flags and nationalism.

For me, he lost all credibility when he said that Brexit was done and people should accept and move on.

breezy1985

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

For me, he lost all credibility when he said that Brexit was done and people should accept and move on.

What should he have said ?

Call for a second referendum would be a complete loser

Professor Moriarty

breezy1985 wrote: »

What should he have said ?

Call for a second referendum would be a complete loser

He shouldn't have said that. It was a pathetic capitulation.

Nody

breezy1985 wrote: »

What should he have said ?

Call for a second referendum would be a complete loser

How about not giving confirmation Boris delivered his promise? How about instead saying "We've left EU yet we have all this problems and negotiations going on still; is this Boris definition of Brexit completed? Leaving all this work and negotiations open, leaving our Fishermen worse off than before? With me as a leader I'll make sure Brexit gets done properly; that we get a deal that actually benefits the UK and not only the London financial elite."

You know; actually being an opposition leader rather than "Yea, my opponent delivered on all his election promises but vote for me anyway".

breezy1985

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He shouldn't have said that. It was a pathetic capitulation.

Any attempt to show any further opposition to Brexit was ended the day Johnson romped home in the last election.

Starters words came before brexit actually kicked in back when people still though mighty Britain was gonna give Johnny foreigner a bloody nose and before mainland Europe started bypassing Kent with loads of new routes to Ireland. If he fought brexit back then he would have be laughed out the door

Joe_ Public

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

He's abstained like a champ. Thought he was weak before elected as leader but hoped he'd be true to his word about being a unifying choice. Well he hasn't even tried, he's atrocious.

If Labour hold Hartlepool he can maybe use that and say it's the first sign he's shoring up the red wall. Fukcing humungous IF though.

It's interesting i think to compare with Biden in terms of how the different wings are being accommodated. Not to stray off topic, but i think there are useful lessons labour could learn on how the dems won that election, particularly in Georgia. They might think they can do without the left, but one thing the left does well is community activism and i'm not sure they could win an election without it being seriously ramped up.

On Hartlepool, i noticed a tweet by John rentoul suggesting the conservatives were fielding a weak candidate so labour might well hold there if so. This new northern independence party looks like it could be a fly in the ointment though, going forward too.

Professor Moriarty

breezy1985 wrote: »

Any attempt to show any further opposition to Brexit was ended the day Johnson romped home in the last election.

Starters words came before brexit actually kicked in back when people still though mighty Britain was gonna give Johnny foreigner a bloody nose and before mainland Europe started bypassing Kent with loads of new routes to Ireland. If he fought brexit back then he would have be laughed out the door

Actually, he said it January. Also, a majority of voters voted for anti-Brexit parties.

breezy1985

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Actually, he said it January. Also, a majority of voters voted for anti-Brexit parties.

Yes but there is a massive difference clearly between winning the majority of voters and winning the election in the UK and going on about Brexit was seen as a bad strategy at the time even on here by both pro and anti labour posters

PommieBast

breezy1985 wrote: »

Any attempt to show any further opposition to Brexit was ended the day Johnson romped home in the last election.

To me the run-up to the 2019 election was pretty much the storyline of Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer. Very few people were paying attention to the details by that point.

Professor Moriarty

breezy1985 wrote: »

Yes but there is a massive difference clearly between winning the majority of voters and winning the election in the UK and going on about Brexit was seen as a bad strategy at the time even on here by both pro and anti labour posters

Corbyn was in charge of the election when Labour was 'going on' about Brexit. Starmer was asked in an interview in January about Brexit and he handwaved it away as if it was a thing of nothing. He did this by telling people it was done and move on. A wonderful and inspiring message to Labour voters and party members, the large majority of whom are pro EU.

Lemming

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

For me, he lost all credibility when he said that Brexit was done and people should accept and move on.

But he's not wrong. Brexit is "done" in the eyes of the electorate-at-large (or they themselves are "done" with it and want to move on). The only viable thing to do is start an actual discussion on what exactly Brexit was meant to mean going forward, as opposed to what the Tories delivered and continue to (not) deliver. The logical end-game to that is given how sh1t it's turned out to be - who knew right? - that maybe just maybe the country should start talking with Europe about closer ties.

Fighting a direct battle over yesterday's war that is now over is a fools errand and setting up for failure, but asking exactly what people thought they were getting with their vote is a smarter play. Whether or not he's the man able to do that remains to be seen of course.

Professor Moriarty

Lemming wrote: »

But he's not wrong. Brexit is "done" in the eyes of the electorate-at-large (or they themselves are "done" with it and want to move on). The only viable thing to do is start an actual discussion on what exactly Brexit was meant to mean going forward, as opposed to what the Tories delivered and continue to (not) deliver. The logical end-game to that is given how sh1t it's turned out to be - who knew right? - that maybe just maybe the country should talking with Europe about closer ties.

Fighting a direct battle over yesterday's war that is now over is a fools errand and setting up for failure, but asking exactly what people thought they were getting with their vote is a smarter play.

Which is exactly what he didn't do when asked by the interviewer and which he continues to ignore.

Leroy42

Lemming wrote: »

But he's not wrong. Brexit is "done" in the eyes of the electorate-at-large (or they themselves are "done" with it and want to move on). The only viable thing to do is start an actual discussion on what exactly Brexit was meant to mean going forward, as opposed to what the Tories delivered and continue to (not) deliver. The logical end-game to that is given how sh1t it's turned out to be - who knew right? - that maybe just maybe the country should talking with Europe about closer ties.

Fighting a direct battle over yesterday's war that is now over is a fools errand and setting up for failure, but asking exactly what people thought they were getting with their vote is a smarter play. Whether or not he's the man able to do that remains to be seen of course.

But that is exactly it. Hammer Johnson over the fact that it isn't done. Its not over.

Drag him over the coals about appointing an unelected bureaucrat to take over from MEPs.

Hammer him over fish. Over the extension to the transition period. To the mess that is NIP.

Why is Gove moved aside? Why are they still paying into EU projects?

No need to fight about Brexit, just like disagreement about taxes doesn't mean one wants to reverse the entire taxation system.

An opposition duty is not to have the answers, that comes closer to an election, but to continually point out that those in charge don't

Lemming

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

For me, he lost all credibility when he said that Brexit was done and people should accept and move on.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Which is exactly what he didn't do when asked by the interviewer and which he continues to ignore.

Brexit was carried out and finished at the end of 2020 in legal terms. The UK is now a whole, whopping, four months into being a third country. If he starts beating that drum now, he's got no hope not least of all because the Tories are hiding behind Covid and nobody (except for businesses and the Guardian) is playing the blindest bit of notice on anything Europe-related unless it's related to AstraZenica, which again comes back to "The Tories are hiding behind Covid".

It's a sh1tty deal (it is also a sh1tty deal) to have been dealt and like I said before, I cannot see how any of the opposition parties can land any punches that will stick until after Covid is left behind.

ancapailldorcha

Brexit is vote repellant at this stage. There's no way the press here will pass at wheeling it out to distract from the government's record over the past year so Starmer needs to avoid it. What he needs to do is decide what he's for. He's had a year and I have no idea what that is. People want change. Suggesting tweaks won't be good enough.

Professor Moriarty

Lemming wrote: »

Brexit was carried out and finished at the end of 2020 in legal terms. The UK is now a whole, whopping, four months into being a third country. If he starts beating that drum now, he's got no hope not least of all because the Tories are hiding behind Covid and nobody (except for businesses and the Guardian) is playing the blindest bit of notice on anything Europe-related unless it's related to AstraZenica, which again comes back to "The Tories are hiding behind Covid".

It's a sh1tty deal (it is also a sh1tty deal) to have been dealt and like I said before, I cannot see how any of the opposition parties can land any punches that will stick until after Covid is left behind.

Yes, Covid is the primary issue but that shouldn't stop Starmer picking holes in the Tories. Regarding Covid, there is the UK's massive mortality rate for instance. But he ignores it. There are lots of opportunities across the Brexit spectrum. But he ignores them. He could hammer home how sh1tty a deal it is in interviews and in the HoC. But he doesn't. I don't know what his logic is but his performance is reflected in recent polling.

Joe_ Public

The leaders strategy seems to be very focus group led from what i've read. It's like he feels constrained about taking positions lest they upset their target groups. Which doesn't read at all like leadership imo. I think they were rather blindsided by the vaccine roll out, likely thinking they could just keep sauntering along and the Tories mismanagement of covid would continue to eat away at them. Suddenly, the government is somewhat aglow in good vibes for a change and labours fence sitting, wait and see strategy is left looking horribly weak.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yes, Covid is the primary issue but that shouldn't stop Starmer picking holes in the Tories. Regarding Covid, there is the UK's massive mortality rate for instance. But he ignores it. There are lots of opportunities across the Brexit spectrum. But he ignores them. He could hammer home how sh1tty a deal it is in interviews and in the HoC. But he doesn't. I don't know what his logic is but his performance is reflected in recent polling.

There are zero opportunities in bringing up Brexit. None, zip, nada. Remember the £350 million extra per week for the NHS and the way that the people who made that promise were held accountable when it wasn't delivered upon? Exactly. All bringing it up again accomplishes is giving Johnson an even easier time in 2024 than he had in 2019.

Everyone knows the deal is appalling it the population here is either apathetic, deadened or resigned to it. Reopening the wound is something that nobody wants. As for covid, all that anyone here is talking about is vaccines and that's ground that Johnson is currently unassailable on.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

There are zero opportunities in bringing up Brexit. None, zip, nada. Remember the £350 million extra per week for the NHS and the way that the people who made that promise were held accountable when it wasn't delivered upon? Exactly. All bringing it up again accomplishes is giving Johnson an even easier time in 2024 than he had in 2019.

Everyone knows the deal is appalling it the population here is either apathetic, deadened or resigned to it. Reopening the wound is something that nobody wants. As for covid, all that anyone here is talking about is vaccines and that's ground that Johnson is currently unassailable on.

When you are asked about Brexit in a TV interview, that is the perfect opportunity to launch an attack on Johnson and his populists. To point out the myriad problems business is encountering. But no. Starmer just tells everyone to move on. And he ignores various opportunities to point to their terrible and tragic Covid mortality rate - a rate actually worse than Italy or Spain. A rate for which Johnson was completely responsible. But no. A few milk and water objections and then nothing. As leader of the opposition, he is about as useful as a lighthouse in a bog.

Professor Moriarty

Joe_ Public wrote: »

The leaders strategy seems to be very focus group led from what i've read. It's like he feels constrained about taking positions lest they upset their target groups. Which doesn't read at all like leadership imo. I think they were rather blindsided by the vaccine roll out, likely thinking they could just keep sauntering along and the Tories mismanagement of covid would continue to eat away at them. Suddenly, the government is somewhat aglow in good vibes for a change and labours fence sitting, wait and see strategy is left looking horribly weak.

Exactly. Starmer is terrified lest he upset any particular wing of the party.