Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Keir Starmer's time is up

The bill passes anyway, the Tory majority makes Labour irrelevant.
What I don't understand is why three line whip to abstain and not vote against? What fucking difference does it make?
 
ska invita said:
The bill passes anyway, the Tory majority makes Labour irrelevant.
What I don't understand is why three line whip to abstain and not vote against? What fucking difference does it make?
Click to expand...

With the 'let soldiers off for war crimes' bill his rationale was he didn't want to be seen as in any way opposed to Our Brave Lads Who Do War Crimes. He could've actually made some kind of principled argument for why war crimes are bad or something, but that would require principles, or at least enough of an idea of what principles are to allow him to pretend to have some.

Starmer's learned his lesson. No more doing anything to upset the gammons. They're the only voting bloc left in the game now after all. And certainly no challenging the tory narrative on anything.
 
two sheds said:
Also has the benefit that he can weed out any remaining people from the left with jobs - anyone stepping out of line gets dismissed, and so also helps keep people in order.
Click to expand...

Yes and that's a really shit tactical move. Nadia Whittome is really popular, especially on her home turf in Nottingham where the previous Blairite turncoat Chris Leslie was widely loathed. But Starmer doesn't get that, or the value of having politicians that can relate to, and actually are, normal folk.
 
Last edited:
SpookyFrank said:
With the 'let soldiers off for war crimes' bill his rationale was he didn't want to be seen as in any way opposed to Our Brave Lads Who Do War Crimes. He could've actually made some kind of principled argument for why war crimes are bad or something, but that would require principles, or at least enough of an idea of what principles are to allow him to pretend to have some.

Starmer's learned his lesson. No more doing anything to upset the gammons. They're the only voting bloc left in the game now after all. And certainly no challenging the tory narrative on anything.
Click to expand...
In which case whip to support the bill...abstaining is the same as not voting for in all practical terms. The difference between voting against and abstaining is semantic in this case.
 
ska invita said:
The bill passes anyway, the Tory majority makes Labour irrelevant.
What I don't understand is why three line whip to abstain and not vote against? What fucking difference does it make?
Click to expand...
Had our clp last week, the mp was justifying her abstention. ‘We can’t be seen to be against veterans’ ‘we can’t do anything unless we’re in power’ and ‘we’ll look to amend it later’ was her bullshit.
 
belboid said:
Had our clp last week, the mp was justifying her abstention. ‘We can’t be seen to be against veterans’ ‘we can’t do anything unless we’re in power’ and ‘we’ll look to amend it later’ was her bullshit.
Click to expand...
mind boggles

how is it against veterans?
how is abstaining different from voting against
no one is even watching this - I havent even seen it reported other than Nadine + 2 getting sacked off.
which is another thing - why isnt this being reported more prominently? in my mind its a huge event
 
NoXion said:
Labour are still slaves to PR, which basically means running scared of the tabloid scum. Why?! Their circulation, and thus their influence, has been on a downward trend for years.
Click to expand...
are the tabloids even reporting it? this is hardly immigration controls on mugs moment. genuinely baffled
dont allow torture etc should be a labour open goal against the nasty cunt party
 
Last edited:
two sheds said:
tbf if corbyn had been leader still and labour had block voted against, the tabloids would be having front pages accusing him of sympathy for terrorists, hatred of our brave boys and girls, and the like.
Click to expand...
i disagree... My impression is this whole bill is being consciously ignored by the press as it's indefensible.
Objecting to is an easy position to take in that what is being enacted is outrageous and wouldn't have public support
 
Pickman's model said:
50 years of bond films have given generations the impression that when our secret services torture and kill they do so suavely and with good manners.
Click to expand...
to be serious i genuinely believe that if the general public were even aware this was happening (which they aren't) they wouldn't support it - i think theyd in the vast majority say it is deeply "against british values" (sic). i feel ill waffling about this knowing its going through into law so smoothly. so depressing
 
Last edited:
ska invita said:
Hard to disagree, but any press attack line of Our Brave Secret Services must be able to kill torture and rape with impunity isn't going to go far
Click to expand...

Even if the press attacked Labour for voting against the government (which is what the opposition is actually supposed to do, clues in the name) it's hard to see how it would cost Labour anything. Not like they've got a poll lead to maintain, or any kind of traction at all with the general public.

It's ideological for Starmer this one. He fucking loves his law and order, provided neither applies to the people supposedly upholding them. If anything I'm surprised he didn't whip his MPs to support the bill. Remember this is the man who could've prosecuted undercover filth and their handlers for perverting the course of justice, human rights violations, rape etc but didn't.
 
Unite decides to cut Labour affiliation money amid frustrations
A meeting of the Unite union executive has decided to cut its affiliation money to the Labour Party by about 10%, BBC Newsnight understands. Unite is the Labour Party's single biggest donor, providing the party with millions in funding every year.
Click to expand...
But there is anger in the union about Labour's direction under Sir Keir Starmer with a source saying he and his inner team were "just not listening". The Labour Party has so far not commented on the decision.
Click to expand...
If other unions follow suit it could be a case of Keir today, gone tomorrow (apologies if someone's already made that joke)
 
two sheds said:
tbf if corbyn had been leader still and labour had block voted against, the tabloids would be having front pages accusing him of sympathy for terrorists, hatred of our brave boys and girls, and the like.
Click to expand...

they would regardless of how they voted. Fuck, Corbyn could have hacked up Bin Laden with a rusty trowel and used his dismembered corpse as an allotment scarecrow and he'd still be painted as terrorist sympather.
 
Count Cuckula said:
They should do a 100% cut
Click to expand...

No chance of that. Unite hacks are embedded in the Labour Party at every level. The 10% cut is smart - membership income is dropping due to Covid lay offs, redundancies, short time working etc - and can also serve as a ‘warning’ to Starmer. But the idea that the union leadership and lay bureaucrats would walk away from Labour misreads their symbiotic relationship.

Far more effective would be members taking action to opt out of the political fund. A course of action that many members take once they become aware that they are paying in to it and that they can decide not to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Kemi Badenoch’s time is up!
2 3 4 5
Replies
143
Views
4K
Petcha
P
krtek a houby
King William’s time is up
Replies
7
Views
595
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
tim
Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby's time is up.
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
2K
Boo Radley75
Boo Radley75
Kid_Eternity
David Lammy’s time is up
Replies
11
Views
684
Whagwan
Whagwan
Larry O'Hara
Chancellor Rachel Reeves: Her Time Is Up!
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
319
Views
12K
pbsmooth
P
Back
Top Bottom