Keir Starmer

[Neil G]

23 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Oh, no. I was meaning other people (I think it was Red Phoenix in here that was suggesting he was hounding our socialists). I guess we will see how Miliband he is... I think he has a cutthroat ability that Miliband doesn’t have, and his career separates him out as somebody with conviction. Only time will tell, I guess. itll be interesting. 

Ok, gotcha.

 

One thing that gives me hope on that score is Miliband being back in the shadow cabinet. He’s hinted he wishes he’d been bolder as leader and not listened so much to the voices of caution. Hopefully he’ll be in a position to remind Starmer of this if he does start to wobble.

[Sugar Ape]

4 hours ago, Neil G said:

Yes, I do want him to emulate the tone and pitch of their criticisms. I think they’ve judged it right so far. I don’t know why you’ve referenced the election result, it’s not relevant at all here. There were lots of reasons why they lost so badly; being nasty to the Tories wasn’t one of them. And I don’t know why you’re strawmanning about being abusive either. Corbyn, Abbott or McDonnell never called anyone a cunt, and no-one’s suggesting they or anyone else starts now. Like Duff Man said you can be critical and forensic without getting personal.

 

You’re directing your “not having a leader” ire at the wrong person, I already said Jairz’s criticism was OTT.

 

I know it’s difficult for Labour to get coverage at the moment, that’s precisely why I’m suggesting Starmer tries to take more control over the media agenda and create regular media events with him as the sole focus, in a professional-looking setting rather than outside his house or on Zoom from his living room. People would see more of him than they are now and associate serious scrutiny of the government with him and Labour the way they’re currently doing with Piers Morgan. Moreover it would give a lead to the media and influence the questions they ask at the daily government press conference, amplifying Labour’s message. He had a good PMQs today, but that’s once a week - he needs to make that kind of impact more regularly.

 

As for your last paragraph, anybody seriously adopting that attitude needs to have a fucking word with themselves, because this government’s mistakes are costing lives every day.

Disagree with everything you’ve put in your first paragraph. It’d be a disaster emulating Corbyn, McDonnell etc... and, pretty clear to me, I’m referencing the election result because you’re advocating him following the same pitch and media tone that led his predecessors to an historic loss. I don’t think they’ve changed what they are saying since going to the back benches from what they were saying from the front benches and I vehemently disagree that is the right way to go and think he’s been pretty much spot on since he took over cumulating in widespread praise yesterday from across the political spectrum for his performance. 
 

Disagree about being nasty to The Tories not being one of the reasons for losing as well. I’m pointing out they had a serious image problem with stuff like McDonnell saying McVey should be lynched and calling her a stain on humanity. Now, I’m sure most people on here, including me, agree she’s a stain on humanity but stuff like that plays really badly with a lot of voters we need to win over. Their tone is certainly a lot more pugnacious than Starmer has been so far. It needs a total change of tactics to disassociate the current leader and front bench from the previous ones. If you think that’s a straw man then so be it. 
 

I’ve already said to Jairzinho what I wanted to say to him, but I’m not directing any ire I have for him towards you. I don’t have any ire towards him anyway I just disagreed with him. However you said “Jairz might be overstating it, but” “Starmer isn’t cutting it as LOTO so far” and “he’s nowhere near visible enough” which are hardly ringing endorsements for him are they? I disagree with what you said just as much as I did with what Jairzinho said. 
 

Your penultimate paragraph, I’d be happy if he wanted to do that but it comes with risks. If it doesn’t get much coverage then he risks becoming a laughing stock, hosting a press conference only The Guardian and The Mirror cover for example. I’m sure the BBC and Sky would cover the first few but if they don’t cover subsequent ones then he’s just preaching to the choir and that’s without mentioning the grief he’d get, and I’ve no doubt he’d get it, from the right wing press and The Tories for politicising the crisis. The Mail and Telegraph would probably show up at his press conferences just to have a go at him. Are any other opposition parties in western countries holding daily press conferences? Serious question because I haven’t noticed any. 
 

Like I said, if he wants to hold them then I’d back that but I think the risks outweigh the potential benefits personally. I think what he’s doing now which is once a week PMQs and having himself or his front bench on the major political shows on TV and doing newspaper articles is the way to go, not to mention scrutiny of the government should increase a lot more now that parliament is reopening albeit virtually. 
 

As for the give ‘em enough rope and they’ll hang themselves approach, I’m sure some people are advocating that in the shadow cabinet. It’s pretty distasteful at a time like this no doubt. Thankfully he doesn’t appear to be doing that and seems to be taking a calm and measured approach to going after them. I’ll throw in ‘forensic’ as well to make Col happy. 
 

I’m going to leave it there anyway Neil, because I don’t think there is much more I can say to you without just repeating myself. You also take a day or two to reply normally and it’s a ball ache scrolling back through the thread to remember what I said and in what context! 
 

Whether his strategy is any good or not will only become clear in the coming weeks and months but, for me, he’s off to a good start. 

[Bjornebye]

But we can still lynch McVey right? 

[Section_31]

What a cunt Peston is, a dilettante and a cretin.

 

[Gnasher]

Let's all join in and take part in a bit of internet bullying

 

Shame he didnt play Corbyns speech which I thought was excellent.

[Jairzinho]

Enjoyed the replies which started with caption this -

 

[Gnasher]

Here's Corbyns question, not shown in the media. 

 

 

 

Fuck off Peston 

[Strontium]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

What a cunt Peston is, a dilettante and a cretin.

 

 

"Man in 70s ignores government advice to self-isolate"

[skend04]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

What a cunt Peston is, a dilettante and a cretin.

 

"Parliament opening its doors for the homeless."

[Section_31]

Saw a pic of Peston the other day dressed as a scruff, suspect it's because Cummings dresses like a scruff. I suspect he's trying to project some kind of Mark Zuckerberg style image, i,e 'I'm such a fucking genius, my body is just a vessel for my brain and I expend minimum thought on adorning it, as I'm too busy thinking'. 

 

It's funny how people who you'd perceive to be in leadership or otherwise high flying roles are such fucking sheep. 

 

I remember some senior manager used to go jogging in her lunch hour at my last job and within a couple of weeks all the fuckers were doing it. 

[sir roger]

Peston started asking a question at the CV conference the other night and I nodded off , and he still hadn't finished when I woke up.

[Mudface]

10 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Peston started asking a question at the CV conference the other night and I nodded off , and he still hadn't finished when I woke up.

I hate his halting delivery. I'm sure it's an affectation designed to make him sound as if he's carefully considering each word as they build into a perfectly constructed, insightful question. In reality, he's a windbag who rarely gets to the point, even if he has one.

[Pureblood]

41 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Peston started asking a question at the CV conference the other night and I nodded off , and he still hadn't finished when I woke up.

The guy from the S*n yesterday asked a question that went on for at least a minute, stupid compound question with loads of different threads to it so the main point was lost by the time he'd finished yapping.  They should stick to simple direct questions. 

[Gnasher]

14 minutes ago, TK421 said:

The guy from the S*n yesterday asked a question that went on for at least a minute, stupid compound question with loads of different threads to it so the main point was lost by the time he'd finished yapping.  They should stick to simple direct questions. 

The cunt from the scum had the bare faced cheek to ask what the government was doing to clamp down on fale news stories on the internet.

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

The cunt from the scum had the bare faced cheek to ask what the government was doing to clamp down on fale news stories on the internet.

Shouldn’t you declare an interest at this point? 

[Rotpeter]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

The cunt from the scum had the bare faced cheek to ask what the government was doing to clamp down on fale news stories on the internet.

Papers are pissed!!!   They used to have a monopoly on that shit.

[Manny]

2 hours ago, TK421 said:

The guy from the S*n yesterday asked a question that went on for at least a minute, stupid compound question with loads of different threads to it so the main point was lost by the time he'd finished yapping.  They should stick to simple direct questions. 

Yep and it just gives them a clear opening to use their favourite question-answering technique:

 

"To respond to the second (i.e. easy) part of your question first, yes, it's very true that we're great and doing brilliantly and may I just take this opportunity to thank those key workers in OUR NHS working flat out to contain this very difficult illness and blah blah blah (insert more self-aggrandising waffle here). To answer the first part of your question: well, maybe. Chris Whitty will, I am sure, give you more clarification on that, in due course."

 

Ages spent answering the part of the question they like with soundbites and unrelated statements, then a nice easy escape of light touch vagueness on the bits of the question they don't.

[Red Phoenix]

5 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

"Man in 70s ignores government advice to self-isolate"

 

5 hours ago, skend04 said:

"Parliament opening its doors for the homeless."

 

He's maintaining a good social distance from the Tory swine, I don't see anything wrong with that really.

[skend04]

11 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

 

He's maintaining a good social distance from the Tory swine, I don't see anything wrong with that really.

Not a punchy enough caption.

[Bjornebye]

7 hours ago, Section_31 said:

What a cunt Peston is, a dilettante and a cretin.

 

"Provisional IRA Anti-Semite threatens Jihad whilst excreting on parliament seats" 

[Sut]

7 hours ago, Section_31 said:

What a cunt Peston is, a dilettante and a cretin.

 

"What a cunt Peston is" was pretty much the caption I'd typed in and then deleted.

[Neil G]

On 23/04/2020 at 05:50, Sugar Ape said:

Disagree with everything you’ve put in your first paragraph. It’d be a disaster emulating Corbyn, McDonnell etc... and, pretty clear to me, I’m referencing the election result because you’re advocating him following the same pitch and media tone that led his predecessors to an historic loss. I don’t think they’ve changed what they are saying since going to the back benches from what they were saying from the front benches and I vehemently disagree that is the right way to go and think he’s been pretty much spot on since he took over cumulating in widespread praise yesterday from across the political spectrum for his performance. 
 

Disagree about being nasty to The Tories not being one of the reasons for losing as well. I’m pointing out they had a serious image problem with stuff like McDonnell saying McVey should be lynched and calling her a stain on humanity. Now, I’m sure most people on here, including me, agree she’s a stain on humanity but stuff like that plays really badly with a lot of voters we need to win over. Their tone is certainly a lot more pugnacious than Starmer has been so far. It needs a total change of tactics to disassociate the current leader and front bench from the previous ones. If you think that’s a straw man then so be it. 
 

I’ve already said to Jairzinho what I wanted to say to him, but I’m not directing any ire I have for him towards you. I don’t have any ire towards him anyway I just disagreed with him. However you said “Jairz might be overstating it, but” “Starmer isn’t cutting it as LOTO so far” and “he’s nowhere near visible enough” which are hardly ringing endorsements for him are they? I disagree with what you said just as much as I did with what Jairzinho said. 
 

Your penultimate paragraph, I’d be happy if he wanted to do that but it comes with risks. If it doesn’t get much coverage then he risks becoming a laughing stock, hosting a press conference only The Guardian and The Mirror cover for example. I’m sure the BBC and Sky would cover the first few but if they don’t cover subsequent ones then he’s just preaching to the choir and that’s without mentioning the grief he’d get, and I’ve no doubt he’d get it, from the right wing press and The Tories for politicising the crisis. The Mail and Telegraph would probably show up at his press conferences just to have a go at him. Are any other opposition parties in western countries holding daily press conferences? Serious question because I haven’t noticed any. 
 

Like I said, if he wants to hold them then I’d back that but I think the risks outweigh the potential benefits personally. I think what he’s doing now which is once a week PMQs and having himself or his front bench on the major political shows on TV and doing newspaper articles is the way to go, not to mention scrutiny of the government should increase a lot more now that parliament is reopening albeit virtually. 
 

As for the give ‘em enough rope and they’ll hang themselves approach, I’m sure some people are advocating that in the shadow cabinet. It’s pretty distasteful at a time like this no doubt. Thankfully he doesn’t appear to be doing that and seems to be taking a calm and measured approach to going after them. I’ll throw in ‘forensic’ as well to make Col happy. 
 

I’m going to leave it there anyway Neil, because I don’t think there is much more I can say to you without just repeating myself. You also take a day or two to reply normally and it’s a ball ache scrolling back through the thread to remember what I said and in what context! 
 

Whether his strategy is any good or not will only become clear in the coming weeks and months but, for me, he’s off to a good start. 

No worries mate, lockdown with a five year old isn’t really conducive to having a flowing dialogue online. I can’t say much to that that I haven’t already said either.
 

I will leave this though, from someone who knows a bit about working the media, if you haven’t seen it already. Makes a lot of the points I’ve been arguing.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/22/coronavirus-deaths-labour-criticise-government-starmer

 

[Neil G]

Here’s the article.

 

With so many coronavirus deaths, Labour should not be holding back

 

Alastair Campbell

 

‘This is no time to criticise the government,’ say some in the party. But with so many errors, Starmer’s team has to speak out

 

Wed 22 April 2020 06:30 BST

 

It has been both a curse and a blessing for Keir Starmer that he has become Labour leader amid a global pandemic.

 

A curse because in normal times his arrival would be huge news, an opportunity quickly to establish himself firmly in the national conversation; yet in a crisis the last thing the public wants is politics as usual, so this limits his chance to be heard.

 

A blessing, because the current situation plays to Starmer’s strengths – he is serious, forensic, consensus-seeking, and has a strong grasp of detail. These qualities will become especially important when we are through the worst, and “Starmer or Johnson?” becomes the choice of prime minister. They are qualities Boris Johnson proudly lacks, one of the reasons the UK has been so badly hit.

 

Gordon Brown helpful things to say, based on experience, about managing financial crisis. Tony Blair has useful things to say about reordering government around the current challenges on issues such as mass testing, contact tracing, PPE, business, vaccine development, schools, use of technology, social distancing and compliance, travel, and communications. He has suggestions on structure too – an expert task force on each challenge.

 

Whether the government heeds Blair or not, this is not a bad way for the opposition to reorder its approach. There are many experts, academics, business figures, unions, charities and campaign groups that feel they are not being heard by government. There are scientists who feel the experts deployed at No 10 briefings are too establishment, too secretive, and not challenging enough of ministers. Mobilising them around the challenges Blair prioritised would bring greater rigour and effectiveness to the opposition operation.

 

In his leadership acceptance speech, Starmer set a sensible tone – supportive of government objectives, but questioning and scrutinising in a reasonable manner. Yet when so many are dying, so many targets are unmet, so many NHS and care workers are going to work unprotected, and so many mistakes have been made, Labour should frankly show no mercy on issues such as PPE and testing. I keep thinking what John Smith – Blair’s predecessor as Labour leader, and like Starmer a QC – would have made of the Turkish plane farce. There would be no holding back. In interviews with some of Starmer’s team, there has been too much “now is not the time for criticism, those questions can wait” for a crisis of this scale.

 

Ministers should be treated with fairness, because they have enormous responsibility and pressure. But they must be challenged. It is not challenging and questioning per se that helps them do their jobs better; it is that it forces them to amass arguments, data and information, so it is all there at their fingertips.

 

Starmer rightly pressed the government for the parameters of a lockdown exit strategy. Even better, Labour must develop its own ideas about the exit, to show not only that it asks the right questions, but has answers. The shadow cabinet must, with proper expert advice, be a credible alternative government.

 

Much of the focus will fall on Starmer. But every single shadow minister must be empowered to challenge, cajole, offer alternatives and challenge the government to answer one of the best questions in politics: “Why not?” In showing diligence and attention to detail, and by making intelligent suggestions and proposals, they will demonstrate their capability.

 

Shadow chancellor Anneliese Dodds must work to develop a profile as high as her predecessor, John McDonnell, because ultimately the future of the economy, and what kind of values underpin our society in a world of turmoil, is where the main post-crisis arguments are going to fall.

 

It is easy to overlook the fact that, Starmer’s role as director of public prosecutions apart, none of the people in the top shadow jobs have senior government experience. But nor did Blair or Brown; nor did John Prescott, or Robin Cook, who ran the Major government ragged before, during and after the Scott inquiry (on Iraq arms sales). What they and others had was real hunger, energy, drive; a determination to ferret out detail the government wanted hidden; an ability to make the media sit up and take notice because of what they were saying and how they were saying it. There can be no soft-pedalling. Oppositions have to win power; governments will do everything they can not to lose it.

 

From my years in opposition working with Blair I remember that, even at the time of the Dunblane school massacre, as sensitive a time as could be imagined, Labour had a different approach on the issue of firearms, and pressed it, sensitively. And in government, when Blair and Brown faced crises – foot-and-mouth, fuel protests, times of war – the Tories were never backward in coming forward to attack, so Labour should not fall for the current line from the right that their role is to support the government.

 

It has been noticeable how rarely, at government briefings and interviews, questions have been framed by things Labour has said or done; that must change. Labour needs to be thinktank, policy expert, advocate for real people in difficulty, and campaign organiser all in one. Backbenchers too are vital in this. There are so many causes and campaigns arising from this crisis.

 

Up till now, No 10 briefings, at which both government presentation and media questioning have generally been poor, have provided the main focus for questioning ministers. Now that parliament is back, albeit in a highly unusual form, Labour has the chance to show it can do a better job of holding the government to account than the media; and a better job than the government in showing what needs to be done, and how.

 

Seizing that opportunity will go a long way towards the public deciding whether the long, wasted years of unelectability are behind us, and a credible alternative government now exists.

 

• Alastair Campbell was Tony Blair’s press secretary and director of communications from 1994-2003

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/22/coronavirus-deaths-labour-criticise-government-starmer

[Sugar Ape]

43 minutes ago, Neil G said:

No worries mate, lockdown with a five year old isn’t really conducive to having a flowing dialogue online. I can’t say much to that that I haven’t already said either.
 

I will leave this though, from someone who knows a bit about working the media, if you haven’t seen it already. Makes a lot of the points I’ve been arguing.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/22/coronavirus-deaths-labour-criticise-government-starmer

 

As someone in lockdown with a four year old I feel your pain. 
 

That’s an interesting article from Campbell. As much as he is a cunt you can’t deny he is, or at the least was, very good at his job. 
 

I think when he was describing the strengths of Starmer - in his words “serious, forensic, consensus-seeking, and has a strong grasp of detail.“ - he sort of undermines the case for Starmer being more aggressive. I just don’t think that is his strength and you should always play to your strengths. 
 

If Johnson was in opposition to Starmer at this moment in time I’d expect him to be taking more of a stance like Campbell suggests because he hasn’t got it in him to get the better of Starmer in a debate like Starmer did with Raab the other day. 
 

From the little I’ve seen of Dodds she looks like she’s cut from the same cloth as Starmer. I wonder if a better strategy would be to have Starmer and Dodds carry on as they have been but have someone else on the front bench take a more aggressive tone through the media. Not sure who though, Ashworth doesn’t seem suited for that role either even though he’d be the best placed to do it. 

[Neil G]

1 hour ago, Sugar Ape said:

As someone in lockdown with a four year old I feel your pain. 
 

That’s an interesting article from Campbell. As much as he is a cunt you can’t deny he is, or at the least was, very good at his job. 
 

I think when he was describing the strengths of Starmer - in his words “serious, forensic, consensus-seeking, and has a strong grasp of detail.“ - he sort of undermines the case for Starmer being more aggressive. I just don’t think that is his strength and you should always play to your strengths. 
 

If Johnson was in opposition to Starmer at this moment in time I’d expect him to be taking more of a stance like Campbell suggests because he hasn’t got it in him to get the better of Starmer in a debate like Starmer did with Raab the other day. 
 

From the little I’ve seen of Dodds she looks like she’s cut from the same cloth as Starmer. I wonder if a better strategy would be to have Starmer and Dodds carry on as they have been but have someone else on the front bench take a more aggressive tone through the media. Not sure who though, Ashworth doesn’t seem suited for that role either even though he’d be the best placed to do it. 

I’m not looking for aggressive Mark, if you’ve inferred that from my referencing Piers Morgan then that’s not what I meant. It’s not his hectoring tone I want Starmer to copy, it’s the intensity and incisiveness of his questioning. 

 

Assertive, challenging, and conveying justified anger on behalf of the people affected, without crossing the line into aggression or abuse, is an entirely appropriate and achievable balance. I think Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell have all managed it in response to the crisis, irrespective of how they might have presented themselves before the election. I’ve no doubt Starmer could manage it too if he wanted - I’m sure he’ll have shown more edge when grilling witnesses as a QC than he did against Raab or has done in his public statements so far.

 

The government’s mismanagement of this crisis is the biggest political scandal in this country since the Iraq war, and the media are barely addressing it. It therefore merits a more robust and less respectful response than Starmer and Labour have offered so far, imo. He’ll have to adopt a more forceful stance anyway when the Tories start to weaponise the crisis once the worst has passed - it would be more authentic and more effective if he started now.

 

If he won’t do it and needs someone else from the front bench to turn the screw, Angela Rayner would be my shout.