Starmer descending into worrying authoritarian language

[BillyStubbsTears]

By the way Tyke. On one hand you criticise Labour for not supporting electoral pacts. On the other you sing the praises of the Unions.

It was the Union vote at Conference this year that block a motion which had overwhelming support from the members that called for electoral pacts. Which way do you want it?

[tyke1962]

By the way Tyke. On one hand you criticise Labour for not supporting electoral pacts. On the other you sing the praises of the Unions.

It was the Union vote at Conference this year that block a motion which had overwhelming support from the members that called for electoral pacts. Which way do you want it?

No Billy I criticise Starmer for not honouring his leadership pledges pre leadership election .

I find it abhorrent that the centre and right of the party whether in parliament , members or those who support Starmer won't call it out .

I find it abhorrent that nothing is said of Starmer the democracy denier and his ill fated second referendum .

I find it abhorrent that a man such as Mandelson whose on the record as plotting against its twice elected leader by a landslide should be brought back to higher echelons of the party and nobody says shyte .

It seems sticking two fingers up to democracy , bare faced lying to promote your career and a lack of integrity sits fine just as long as the tune getting played is music to the ears of those of a political persuasion .

How low the bar can go is anyone's guess .

You'll have to be more specific with the union's electoral pact .

There's unions who are happy to happy clap to the Starmer tune and there's a couple who have pulled the funding .

[albie]

And the bit about the previous manager leaving the party divided, having to pay court costs and with the worst defeat since Culloden?

Albie someone has to get a grip.

Sydney,

Only just seen this, and you are as wrong as you could be.

Labour is more divided under Keith than it has ever been in my lifetime.
Loss of members, and reductions in union financial support is a total disaster before the next GE.

Starmer did not inherit court costs.
Labour had legal advice that the claims of anti-semitism were without merit, and Labour would win if taken to court.

Starmer preferred to avoid having to present evidence in court which would have exposed the false claims, because it would demonstrate the point made about creating a false narrative.
This would have undermined the extreme centrists, so Keith settled out of court.

Worst defeat since Culloden?
I think not.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Albie.

The Left love that idea that Corbyn won so many votes in 2017.

It is meaningless because it ignores the single most important fact.

2017 is the only election of this century where it was effectively a straight fight in England and Wales between Labour and the Tories.

UKIP were strong in 2015.
LDs were strong throughout the 00s.

But in 2017, those two were effectively sidelined. UKIP had vanished because, temporarily Brexit wasn't an issue. The LDs had committed suicide by being in the Coalition. None of that was Corbyn's doing. It was simply circumstance. You basically only had two choices in most of England and Wales in 2017.

Now consider this. even with the Left deserting Labour and wasting their support on the Greens, and even with the LDs having been given a boost by Corbyn's Brexit policy in 2019, Stamer's Labour party is still up at around 37% in the polls. Which would give Labour 11,000,000+ votes if there was an election tomorrow. Think where they would be if those people from the Left didn't waste their votes and give Johnson an inside run.

[albie]

BST,

As you well know, the worst Labour vote in modern times was that for Prudence Broon in 2010.
28% of the vote is extremely poor, but is not just the fault of Broon and his policies. The rot set in earlier with Blair, and Broon failed to halt the decline by doubling down on centrism.

Reverting back to the policies which brought universal apathy is a braindead response, unless you hold to magical incantation as a political philosophy.

Whatever the temporary standing of Labour in the polls, it makes no difference if those votes are not in the right place under FPTP.

Labour could, in theory, achieve the greater share of the votes cast and still lose the GE under FPTP.
The current polling suggests only a reduced Tory majority.

So, are Labour improving in Scotland? This is the critical measure of viability.
No is the answer, so in that one measure a Labour success is highly unlikely.

You seem to believe that repeating that Johnson or nowt is the choice is going to persuade folk to back nowt.
Zero evidence that I can see to support that theory.

[BillyStubbsTears]

As you well know, the worst Labour vote in modern times was that for Prudence Broon in 2010.
28% of the vote is extremely poor, but is not just the fault of Broon and his policies. The rot set in earlier with Blair, and Broon failed to halt the decline by doubling down on centrism.

This is a classic of the genre "I've decided what I want my conclusion to be and I'll  interpret the facts in a way that supports what I've already decided."

Yes Labour got hammered in 2010. Very, very few Governments win after 13 years in power. Very, very few Governments win after the worst recession in three generations. So Labour getting hammered wasn't a surprise. But to attribute it to Labour nor being Left enough is a conclusion you have pulled out of thin air, because you want it to be right.

Labour lost in 2010 because their votes from 2001 and 2005 went to Clegg's LDs and Cameron's Tories, not to vanguards of the Socialist Utopia. Corbyn's success (sic) in 2017 was largely due to the LDs having collapsed as an option for anyone on the centre-Left.

[albie]

BST,

You are projecting your own interpretation again.
I did not say Broon wasn't left enough for voters...Broon lost because he stood for continuity of policies that the electorate had tired of.

There was nothing new or distinctive in the offer, just the others are worse....not a good sales pitch.
This is precisely the same mistake dour Keith is making, vote for me or it will be worse...hopeless marketing.

I would be cautious about saying governments can't win after 13 years in power, because the Tories are likely to do that after 14 years on current form. Better to say that Labour have a much bigger problem with timelines under FPTP.

Consider for a moment those you say are wasting their vote by choosing Greens or another party.
Why would they be doing so?

Could it be the hostile environment Keith and his handlers have built within Labour?
Make people homeless and they will seek shelter....the far centre has a very poor grasp of human psychology.
Right up there with football managers IMO.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I don't know why people on the Left are insisting on acting in a way that would keep Johnson in power. It genuinely baffles me. My take has always been to hold my nose and vote in a way that produces the least bad outcome, rather than indulge myself and call it "being principled".

[albie]

There you go again, BST.

Its not just people on the left, is it?
It is people who do not see what Keith brings to the party, how he gives them a belief in something better.

Pitching a return to the dog days of New Labour is about as welcome as a death at a birthday party.
Keith is correctly seen as beige meets grey, and with the personality of a wet fart.

Nothingness as a defining characteristic is not the way to hearts and minds, but the Labour right is just too thick to see it.

[BillyStubbsTears]

And yet...18 months after taking over a party which Corbyn had left at 24% in the polls, Labour are currently on 37% and rising.

And yes I know that's not enough. It'd be more if a few more people held their nose and supported a flawed left of centre party rather than open the door for Johnson.

[tyke1962]

And yet...18 months after taking over a party which Corbyn had left at 24% in the polls, Labour are currently on 37% and rising.

And yes I know that's not enough. It'd be more if a few more people held their nose and supported a flawed left of centre party rather than open the door for Johnson.

Have you considered that enough people are doing alright and Starmer isn't attractive enough to want to change things Billy ?

[BillyStubbsTears]

No Tyke.

I've considered that since Starmer replaced Corbyn, the number of 2019 Labour voters who now say they will vote Green has doubled. And if there was an election tomorrow, those votes would be the difference between a Labour Govt or a Johnson Govt.

[albie]

Keith has asked women complaining about sexual harassment to sign non-disclosure agreements;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/04/labour-women-urge-party-not-to-use-ndas-for-sexual-harassment-allegations

Talk about authoritarian!
Absolutely appalling behaviour.....I hope the unions representing these women back them to the hilt.

[danumdon]

This just stinks of the desperately poor judgement and leadership that permeates from Starmer, he has form for these type of underhand dealings going back to his DPP days when dealing with the Rotherham and Saville issues.

My advice to Labour, get rid, this dull grey man, makes John Major look like action man on steroids, how Labour ever saddled itself with this leader will be its constant epitaph after another Johnson led victory, that will live with us all forever.

Will we ever have a political party leader, who can be called that without constant guffaws from all sides.

[selby]

  I had to giggle at Mike Graeme saying it was two years to the day today that old Stabber had become the leader of the Labour Party, and that they were going to discuss how the party had changed under his leadership.
  But there would still be two hour fifty eight minutes to discuss other main topics.

[wilts rover]

  I had to giggle at Mike Graeme saying it was two years to the day today that old Stabber had become the leader of the Labour Party, and that they were going to discuss how the party had changed under his leadership.
  But there would still be two hour fifty eight minutes to discuss other main topics.

I have said before and will say again - there is no way the right wing media will allow a Labour government. If they cant find stories they will just invent them - and the better they do in the polls the more they will be attacked.

Did Mike Graeme mention the billionaire wife of the Chancellor of the Exchequer is recorded as a non-domicile for tax purposes? Thus she has avoided tax on all overseas earnings, inculding her £400 million Russian investments, whilst her husband at British taxpayers expense. Thought not - he should stick to growing concrete.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mike Graham is quite something.

I'd assumed that he wouldn't ever be taken seriously by anyone again after his verbal diarrhoea resulted in him saying concrete grows like wood.

But I see Selby is still lis...ahhh! Yep, I see the flaw in my post.

[SydneyRover]

Mike Graham is quite something.

I'd assumed that he wouldn't ever be taken seriously by anyone again after his verbal diarrhoea resulted in him saying concrete grows like wood.

But I see Selby is still lis...ahhh! Yep, I see the flaw in my post.

Graham is a lot smarter than his listeners, he's the one on the big salary feeding the chooks

[SydneyRover]

  I had to giggle at Mike Graeme saying it was two years to the day today that old Stabber had become the leader of the Labour Party, and that they were going to discuss how the party had changed under his leadership.
  But there would still be two hour fifty eight minutes to discuss other main topics.

I have said before and will say again - there is no way the right wing media will allow a Labour government. If they cant find stories they will just invent them - and the better they do in the polls the more they will be attacked.

Did Mike Graeme mention the billionaire wife of the Chancellor of the Exchequer is recorded as a non-domicile for tax purposes? Thus she has avoided tax on all overseas earnings, inculding her £400 million Russian investments, whilst her husband at British taxpayers expense. Thought not - he should stick to growing concrete.

This is quite something that she first had to be shamed into shutting down the russian arm of the business and than we find that she doesn't pay tax in the UK, this says it all about the privileged classes, especially as you read on this forum about members struggling with their everyday energy bills.

[ravenrover]

Slightly wrong there she doesn't pay tax on income from abroad. Any income from the UK is taxed. Yes on face value it stinks but there is nothing wrong in it. She pays taxes where she is domiciled, presumably in India where she was born, on foreign income but at what rate one wonders

[SydneyRover]

Yep I accept that Raven, thanks, let's hope her visas is up to date, otherwise May will be on her case.

[SydneyRover]

And a bit more to the story

''However, tax experts have said non-dom status is not automatic but a choice.

Prof Richard Murphy, a Sheffield University academic who co-founded the Tax Justice Network, said: “Domicile has nothing to do with a person’s nationality. In other words, the claims made in the statement issued by Ms Murty are wrong, and as evidence, just because a person has Indian citizenship will never automatically grant them non-dom status in the UK.”''

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/07/kwasi-kwarteng-defends-non-domicile-tax-status-of-chancellors-wife-akshata-murthy-rishi-sunak

[phil old leake]

Let’s be honest. Who in their right mind wouldn’t avoid tax if they could
It’s not the people who are doing wrong it’s the system that allows it

[SydneyRover]

Let’s be honest. Who in their right mind wouldn’t avoid tax if they could
It’s not the people who are doing wrong it’s the system that allows it

And that's the question phil, are the circumstances contrived, is the option available to all.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Let’s be honest. Who in their right mind wouldn’t avoid tax if they could
It’s not the people who are doing wrong it’s the system that allows it

Of course, our Chancellor could tighten up the rules. But that would make the atmos at tea time a bit frosty...

[phil old leake]

Is this actually a nothing story created by Labour to try and undermine the Chancellor

Unless I’ve missed something (which wouldn’t be the first time) there is nothing to suggest she’s not paying tax. She’s just not paying tax in this country on business interests abroad. I’m assuming she’s paying tax where the businesses are based

[ravenrover]

The main point seems to be where her permanent home is it appears thete are 4, 3 in GB 1 in USA but none registered in India

[Filo]

Let’s be honest. Who in their right mind wouldn’t avoid tax if they could
It’s not the people who are doing wrong it’s the system that allows it

Of course, our Chancellor could tighten up the rules. But that would make the atmos at tea time a bit frosty...

Not really her non dom status means her main home is India

[wilts rover]

Is this actually a nothing story created by Labour to try and undermine the Chancellor

Unless I’ve missed something (which wouldn’t be the first time) there is nothing to suggest she’s not paying tax. She’s just not paying tax in this country on business interests abroad. I’m assuming she’s paying tax where the businesses are based

Quite the opposite Phil, there is nothing to confirm that the billionairess Mrs Sunak is paying tax:

NEW: spokesperson for Rishi Sunak's wife, Akshata Murty, says:
• It is not "relevant" where she pays tax on overseas income.
• She pays £30,000 a year to keep her UK non-dom status.
• It is possible the arrangements mean she uses tax havens.

https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1512090627168632839

Or how the news came out. It certainly wasn't created by Labour. It was leaked to a newspaper and Labour have commented on the story only after it came out. Nothing at all on their comms.

Yah makes your own choices about who wanted to knock down Sunak's popularity? Apparently there were rows last week over Sunak's budget that Johnson wanted more spending but Sunak over-ruled him. And that photo of Johnson having a party in his garden that got in the papers and turned the public against him - where was it taken from again and how did it get out?

[phil old leake]

Wilts as I said maybe I misunderstood
I stand enlightened