Keir Starmer's time is up

[Gramsci]

Away from the media circus I was chatting with my brother's daughter few weeks back. She joined Labour when she was 14. Along with those who joined enthused by Corbyn.

She's now left. She has been quite active in local party. She feels since Starmer got to be leader the newer membership have been treated with contempt. She's now in last year of Uni. She hasn't joined any other political group.

She was particularly upset by Rachel Reeves recent comments on welcoming drop in membership.

She was angry about leaving the party.

She comes from Labour voting family. Here parents work in public sector ( NHS and social services).

I would have thought the Labour party would have tried to keep and get more members like her.

If she is representative of other young people then Starmer and those he's appointed have lost a young enthusiastic young generation for good.

Long term this can only breed more cynicism and disaffection for the future in the political system.

The media circus on Starmer , Boris and Saville attacks is missing what's happening on the ground with younger people.

 

[Leighsw2]

Not sure how much store to place in this article, but a reminder that Starmer was leading CPS during the decision making on Assange as well as Savile. Also, if the stuff on Mishcon de Reya is true, then it's precisely the kind of 'coincidence' that makes people cynical about politics.
How the Establishment Functions - Craig Murray

There is an interesting issue here about the concept of 'responsibility' in public service - if you're head of a public service (and taking £130,000 for it) how 'responsible' are you when it fucks up? Keir Starmer did not personally take the decision about Savile, but he was the head of the organisation that did. Apparently, according to the establishment commentariat, the existence of the former means we can't mention the latter.

 

[Leighsw2]

Away from the media circus I was chatting with my brother's daughter few weeks back. She joined Labour when she was 14. Along with those who joined enthused by Corbyn.

She's now left. She has been quite active in local party. She feels since Starmer got to be leader the newer membership have been treated with contempt. She's now in last year of Uni. She hasn't joined any other political group.

She was particularly upset by Rachel Reeves recent comments on welcoming drop in membership.

She was angry about leaving the party.

She comes from Labour voting family. Here parents work in public sector ( NHS and social services).

I would have thought the Labour party would have tried to keep and get more members like her.

If she is representative of other young people then Starmer and those he's appointed have lost a young enthusiastic young generation for good.

Long term this can only breed more cynicism and disaffection for the future in the political system.

The media circus on Starmer , Boris and Saville attacks is missing what's happening on the ground with younger people.

Very interesting point - one useful litmus test to apply to the party is "what is it about Labour that the Conservatives would like to have?" As of 2017/18 the answer would probably have been "a mass membership party of 500,00 people" and "overwhelming support from the under-35s". Interesting how Starmer Labour is quite happy to give away both of these advantages in return for nothing.

The next General Election will be an interesting test case for Starmer's version of Labour - is it possible to win a first-past-the-post election with no electoral base and running everything from a call centre because there's no-one left to knock on doors for you? We shall see!

 

[Dogsauce]

The next General Election will be an interesting test case for Starmer's version of Labour - is it possible to win a first-past-the-post election with no electoral base and running everything from a call centre because there's no-one left to knock on doors for you? We shall see!

corporate donations buy a lot of Facebook visibility. It worked for the Tories so I guess Starmer is going with that approach.

 

[Gramsci]

corporate donations buy a lot of Facebook visibility. It worked for the Tories so I guess Starmer is going with that approach.

I listened to the Radio 4 politics programme on Saturday mornings about a month ago. Labour MP was asked about drop in membership and reduction in funding.

His answer was that these things go up and down. That under Starmer there is fundraising drive to get "high net worth individuals" to put money into Labour party.

He was happy about that. As this was the BBC no one questioned him on that comment.

 

[Gramsci]

Very interesting point - one useful litmus test to apply to the party is "what is it about Labour that the Conservatives would like to have?" As of 2017/18 the answer would probably have been "a mass membership party of 500,00 people" and "overwhelming support from the under-35s". Interesting how Starmer Labour is quite happy to give away both of these advantages in return for nothing.

The next General Election will be an interesting test case for Starmer's version of Labour - is it possible to win a first-past-the-post election with no electoral base and running everything from a call centre because there's no-one left to knock on doors for you? We shall see!

I seem to remember The39thStep posting somewhere here ( the very good point that I hadn't seen) that Biden didn't go down the route of alienating the new younger more membership who supported Sanders. So they did get out and knock on doors.

So Starmer had a political choice to make. It wasn't inevitable or necessary to make people like my Brothers daughter so pissed off they left.

 

[gosub]

The old 'PM's of support' ploy

 

[rekil]

No more Craig Murray links please. He shills for Big Crank.

 

[Chilli.s]

Old starmsie's a bit shit at fighting his corner, perhaps he should try a different tack and claim hes being bullied

 

[billy_bob]

Starmer ally Nick Forbes, who has been leader of Newcastle Council for 10+ years, was deselected by his ward committee last night, by a rather pitiful 13 votes to 4. Don't know what the winning candidate Abdul Samad's affiliations are, if any. Forbes was once tipped for big things in the parliamentary party, but he hasn't really set the world alight.

 

[killer b]

it's incredible that someone who's been leader of the council of one of the biggest cities in the country for a decade could take his eye off the ball so spectacularly tbh. I expect he'll manage to get a winnable seat elsewhere in the city but nonetheless.

 

[billy_bob]

He's left it quite late but yes, I'm sure they're falling over themselves to offer him another one. It's not like they're short of safe seats in Newcastle.

You're right about how impressively cack-handed it was. It's not like the 13 who voted for the other guy represents some kind of entryist meeting-packing: I reckon if anyone had gone to the trouble to do that they could have had dozens there easily - some of Corbyn's best-attended rallies were up here, and I bet Forbes's diverse and youthful inner-west ward sent as many of those attendees as any other.

 

[elbows]

Some detail:

Labour’s Newcastle city council leader deselected ahead of local elections

Starmer ally Nick Forbes, who has run council for more than a decade, loses to activist Abdul Samad

www.theguardian.com

Forbes’s allies have described his defeat as being inflicted by the “hard left” and pointed out that the ward selection meeting was held late, limiting his opportunities to find an alternative potential seat.

But one local activist, who declined to be named, told the Guardian it was “not about left or right,” but about choosing a local candidate who would focus all their energy on the ward, “someone who’s actually prepared to be here, be a lot more hands on.” They added: “We feel for a long time that hasn’t been the case, and we wanted our voices heard.”

A senior Labour source in the north-east pushed back against the idea that the leftwing campaign group Momentum had been involved, describing Samad, a 25-year-old recent master’s graduate, as unaligned with a particular faction. Forbes “basically just lost a vote. That’s what happens in democratic politics,” the source said.

Forbes’s defeat comes against the background of a power-struggle over the direction of wider Newcastle politics.

Two Labour sources said Forbes’s deselection was connected with a clash with the party’s former chief whip Nick Brown. One said Brown had organised efforts to challenge Forbes as leader of the council after a falling out, and that Forbes had known his seat was under potential threat. “It’s obviously damaging and embarrassing. Nick is very accomplished but he did not organise well.”

Brown, the MP for Newcastle upon Tyne East since 1983, was moved out of his longstanding role of opposition chief whip during Starmer’s reshuffle in May 2021.

 

[Dom Traynor]

Doesn't surprise me at all. Forbes has long taken the detail of organising and campaigning for granted.

 

[elbows]

Doesn't surprise me at all. Forbes has long taken the detail of organising and campaigning for granted.

Thatcher and Peter Morrison made the same mistake.

 

[billy_bob]

It's indicative of that complacency when they blame the defeat on some concerted 'hard left' campaign against him. Maybe there was, but let's say it again: 13 votes to 4. That's fucking small-time stuff - it would have been a piece of piss to prevent it, if they'd bothered even one cheek of their arses to do so.

 

[ruffneck23]

Labour facing bankruptcy as union donor Unite says it could pull remaining support

Sir Keir says Labour will not be ‘influenced by threats’

www.independent.co.uk

 

[hitmouse]

Literally just came here to post that - here's the LabourList writeup:

Unite warns funding to Labour "under review" amid dispute with council - LabourList

Sharon Graham has declared that “the remaining financial support” provided by Unite the Union to the Labour Party…

labourlist.org

And a Labour spokesperson is apparently replying with "go on then":


Think it might take quite a few high net worth individuals to make up for Unite.

 

[Sprocket.]

I was going to post the same. Great minds etc.

 

[MickiQ]

Unite is by far and away Labour's biggest donor so them withholding cash is going to hurt but it can't afford to have a parting of the ways with the Labour Party no matter how much it may be pissed off with them. What's it going to do then? donate money to the Tory Party or the LibDems? Labour is the ONLY political force that pays ANY attention to what the TUC or Unite think about anything. Bankrupting them and helping to guarantee a permanent Tory government not the smartest move in the playbook. As for donating it to other political 'projects' they might as well just chuck their money on the fire and burn it the end result will be the same.

 

[Pickman's model]

Unite is by far and away Labour's biggest donor so them withholding cash is going to hurt but it can't afford to have a parting of the ways with the Labour Party no matter how much it may be pissed off with them. What's it going to do then? donate money to the Tory Party or the LibDems? Labour is the ONLY political force that pays ANY attention to what the TUC or Unite think about anything. Bankrupting them and helping to guarantee a permanent Tory government not the smartest move in the playbook. As for donating it to other political 'projects' they might as well just chuck their money on the fire and burn it the end result will be the same.

the rmt seems to be doing alright without affiliation to the labour party
don't see why unite shouldn't do ok without the labour party either

 

[hitmouse]

They're a union, it's their job to represent their members. Graham phrased it as “Our wallet is closed to bad employers”, and that attitude makes sense to me. "The tories are bad" doesn't seem like much of an argument for handing over cash to the people who are fucking over your own members.

 

[Sue]

Unite is by far and away Labour's biggest donor so them withholding cash is going to hurt but it can't afford to have a parting of the ways with the Labour Party no matter how much it may be pissed off with them. What's it going to do then? donate money to the Tory Party or the LibDems? Labour is the ONLY political force that pays ANY attention to what the TUC or Unite think about anything. Bankrupting them and helping to guarantee a permanent Tory government not the smartest move in the playbook. As for donating it to other political 'projects' they might as well just chuck their money on the fire and burn it the end result will be the same.

Well Unite members don't seem to be getting a whole load out of the deal.

 

[MickiQ]

the rmt seems to be doing alright without affiliation to the labour party
don't see why unite shouldn't do ok without the labour party either

The RMT is unique for a great many reasons but that isn't the point, the point is that a Tory Govt will continue to pass anti-union legislation whenever it feels like it, only a Labour Govt (might) repeal any of it. Granted that the current iteration of the Labour Party isn't all that likely to but killing it because some people don't like what it is now doesn't give it the chance to become something else.

Well Unite members don't seem to be getting a whole load out of the deal.

You're right they're not but they will get even less if Starmer calls out Graham's bluff.

They're a union, it's their job to represent their members. Graham phrased it as “Our wallet is closed to bad employers”, and that attitude makes sense to me. "The tories are bad" doesn't seem like much of an argument for handing over cash to the people who are fucking over your own members.

Indeed and I am on their side however their dispute is with the local Labour led council, threatening to cut off funding to the national Labour Party to put pressure on the local one strikes me as a dangerous short term strategy with a high chance of it backfiring on them.

 

[Sprocket.]

The Labour Party will never repeal any anti trade union laws.
It was Barbara Castle’s report “In Times of Strife” that encouraged and emboldened Thatcher and Keith Joseph to dismantle the power of the workers by removing the national reliance on heavy industries.
If it walks like a Tory and quacks like a Tory, it’s a Tory no matter what colour rosette they pin on themselves.

 

[Pickman's model]

The RMT is unique for a great many reasons but that isn't the point, the point is that a Tory Govt will continue to pass anti-union legislation whenever it feels like it, only a Labour Govt (might) repeal any of it. Granted that the current iteration of the Labour Party isn't all that likely to but killing it because some people don't like what it is now doesn't give it the chance to become something else.

the labour party's been shit for decades and decades and i can't see that changing, at least not for the better. last time there was a labour government it was in for 13 years and didn't repeal one word of anti-union legislation.

 

[Pickman's model]

Well Unite members don't seem to be getting a whole load out of the deal.

but LABOUR [/mickiq]

 

[MickiQ]

the labour party's been shit for decades and decades and i can't see that changing, at least not for the better. last time there was a labour government it was in for 13 years and didn't repeal one word of anti-union legislation.

Wouldn't argue with you but what alternatives do you imagine there are?

 

[Serge Forward]

Unite is by far and away Labour's biggest donor so them withholding cash is going to hurt but it can't afford to have a parting of the ways with the Labour Party no matter how much it may be pissed off with them. What's it going to do then? donate money to the Tory Party or the LibDems? Labour is the ONLY political force that pays ANY attention to what the TUC or Unite think about anything. Bankrupting them and helping to guarantee a permanent Tory government not the smartest move in the playbook. As for donating it to other political 'projects' they might as well just chuck their money on the fire and burn it the end result will be the same.

They could give their money to the CBI. The result would be much the same.

 

[Plumdaff]

The unions which most successfully advocate for their workers in this country (I'm thinking RMT, for example) aren't affiliated with Labour and would never have the support of the Labour right. In contrast unions like Unison in the NHS have presided over decades of defeat regardless of who is in government.

As a Unite member I want her to get on with it.