Keir Starmer

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Numerous will be popping up all over the site telling everyone...

Rent free. 

[Scooby Dudek]

They should definitely publish the legal advice they received. It would clarify it one way or another.

[Jose Jones]

28 minutes ago, Scooby Dudek said:

They should definitely publish the legal advice they received. It would clarify it one way or another.

Not really, people would still argue that they should have gone to court, the advice was bollocks, etc. need to keep fighting injustice, etc.

 

It was obviously a political decision to try to close the issue off by Starmer, which I probably agree with, there was absolutely nothing to be gained for Labour by a drawn out court battle with dirty antisemitic infighting laundry being aired everywhere.

 

But he failed to get everyone on board before making the decision and now there’s dirty antisemitic infighting laundry all over the place.

[Gnasher]

15 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Not really, people would still argue that they should have gone to court, the advice was bollocks, etc. need to keep fighting injustice, etc.

 

It was obviously a political decision to try to close the issue off by Starmer, which I probably agree with, there was absolutely nothing to be gained for Labour by a drawn out court battle with dirty antisemitic infighting laundry being aired everywhere.

 

But he failed to get everyone on board before making the decision and now there’s dirty antisemitic infighting laundry all over the place.

The "failed to get everyone on board" bit is a bit of an understatement.

[Numero Veinticinco]

19 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Not really, people would still argue that they should have gone to court, the advice was bollocks, etc. need to keep fighting injustice, etc.

 

It was obviously a political decision to try to close the issue off by Starmer, which I probably agree with, there was absolutely nothing to be gained for Labour by a drawn out court battle with dirty antisemitic infighting laundry being aired everywhere.

 

But he failed to get everyone on board before making the decision and now there’s dirty antisemitic infighting laundry all over the place.

There is zero chance of getting everyone on board with a decision like that, in my opinion. Those still loyal to Corbyn are entrenched in a view derived from the perception of injustice. Maybe rightly, certainly in many cases. So it would never be unanimously supported either way. Some would sooner rip the party apart and subject the country to perpetual Tory rule than give an inch on some of these subjects. As is their right. 
 

In that situation I think you just have to try to do as little damage as possible; make the decision that best gets you through it. I somewhat agree that it was the right decision from a political standpoint, though I’ve no idea on it from a legal perspective. I think you’re spot on about continually fighting it would not gain anything for Labour; Corbyn maybe, but not Labour. It will be interesting to see if Corbyn goes down a different route if given the opportunity. 
 

What a dirty mess to find yourself having to clean up. He has to do it though; he knew what he was taking on so it’s his job to get Labour out of it. Much of the external stuff has stopped, partly because Corbyn has gone and partly because the actions taken by Starmer - rightly or wrongly from a morality perspective - are exactly the actions they wanted. 
 

He has a battle on his hands to get everyone on the same page. That said, judging from polling of Labour supporters that I posted the other day, a significant amount seem to think he’s doing a good job as leader, with only 7% thinking he’s doing a bad job as leader. That’s surprising to me as I think it will take a lot longer to heal divides. Certainly from the extremely partisan Corbynites and ideologically driven snakes that still consider themselves Blairites. That said, those figures seem to indicate that it’s not as bad a split as made out and that he is making early headway. Either way, it’s too early to draw any conclusions. 

[Gnasher]

5 minutes ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

There is zero chance of getting everyone on board with a decision like that, in my opinion. Those still loyal to Corbyn are entrenched in a view derived from the perception of injustice. Maybe rightly, certainly in many cases. So it would never be unanimously supported either way. Some would sooner rip the party apart and subject the country to perpetual Tory rule than give an inch on some of these subjects. As is their right. 
 

In that situation I think you just have to try to do as little damage as possible; make the decision that best gets you through it. I somewhat agree that it was the right decision from a political standpoint, though I’ve no idea on it from a legal perspective. I think you’re spot on about continually fighting it would not gain anything for Labour; Corbyn maybe, but not Labour. It will be interesting to see if Corbyn goes down a different route if given the opportunity. 
 

What a dirty mess to find yourself having to clean up. He has to do it though; he knew what he was taking on so it’s his job to get Labour out of it. Much of the external stuff has stopped, partly because Corbyn has gone and partly because the actions taken by Starmer - rightly or wrongly from a morality perspective - are exactly the actions they wanted. 
 

He has a battle on his hands to get everyone on the same page. That said, judging from polling of Labour supporters that I posted the other day, a significant amount seem to think he’s doing a good job as leader, with only 7% thinking he’s doing a bad job as leader. That’s surprising to me as I think it will take a lot longer to heal divides. Certainly from the extremely partisan Corbynites and ideologically driven snakes that still consider themselves Blairites. That said, those figures seem to indicate that it’s not as bad a split as made out and that he is making early headway. Either way, it’s too early to draw any conclusions. 

Rubbish. Taking union members money and throwing the former labour leader under a bus to placate a bunch of fucking traitors was not "the right political decision" as proven by the Unite leaders threat to cut Labour party funds in the link posted above. As you keep reminding everyone the next election is four years away, Starmer made his statement in sacking Long Bailey and could/should have let the events take their course. It's was a ridiculous decision which could cause an unnecessary split in the party.

[Bruce Spanner]

It should also be noted that Big Len was a RLB supporter quite vocally and is, perhaps, kicking up a stink as his term ending has been ‘brought forward’ which may, or may not, have been his choice. So, perhaps, his ‘outrage’ is quite calculated. 
 

Lots of swamp that needs draining at Unite as well, that troff can only accommodate so many engorged snouts.

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

4 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Rubbish. Taking union members money and throwing the former labour leader under a bus to placate a bunch of fucking traitors was not "the right political decision" as proven by the Unite leaders threat to cut Labour party funds in the link posted above. As you keep reminding everyone the next election is four years away, Starmer made his statement in sacking Long Bailey and could/should have let the events take their course. It's was a ridiculous decision which could cause an unnecessary split in the party.

There’s already a split in the party. Open your eyes. If you think Starmer trying to end this utter mess is the ‘cause of an unnecessary split’ you’ve not been paying attention. It’s not so much a split as a long standing, well established chasm. 

[sir roger]

McCluskey says he will be staying on for his full term , April 2022 in a Guardian article. People can have their views about him as much as they want, but Unite make the largest political donations in the whole of Europe ( £7m since 2019 ) so they have to get some say.

 

 

[Bruce Spanner]

4 minutes ago, sir roger said:

McCluskey says he will be staying on for his full term , April 2022 in a Guardian article. People can have their views about him as much as they want, but Unite make the largest political donations in the whole of Europe ( £7m since 2019 ) so they have to get some say.

 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/18/len-mccluskey-to-step-down-as-unite-leader-earlier-than-planned

 

I fully agree about the Unions having sway, but this should be what’s best for its members, completely, not to fight personal battles.

[Red Phoenix]

What about the rest of us? Where's my Labour Party funds to help me save up for a PC? Tight bastards.

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, Red Phoenix said:

What about the rest of us? Where's my Labour Party funds to help me save up for a PC? Tight bastards.

This is the type of socialism we need and we need it now!

[Captain Howdy]

10 minutes ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

There’s already a split in the party. Open your eyes. If you think Starmer trying to end this utter mess is the ‘cause of an unnecessary split’ you’ve not been paying attention. It’s not so much a split as a long standing, well established chasm. 

Correct, the Labour Party is an absolute fucking mess and wholly unelectable 

[sir roger]

6 minutes ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

There’s already a split in the party. Open your eyes. If you think Starmer trying to end this utter mess is the ‘cause of an unnecessary split’ you’ve not been paying attention. It’s not so much a split as a long standing, well established chasm. 

As I've said before with the mandate he got he had a massive opportunity to take a middle way and bang heads together but practically every decision he has taken internally seems to be favouring the centrist / right of the party.

 

On the Traitor / Whistleblowers thing, I imagine with 9 separate claims there were differing levels of legal advice as to each case. I would have had no problem if settlements had been reached with some if the legal advice suggested it , but some of the people were quite blatantly and publicly antagonistic to the old regime and these cases should have been fought.

[Red Phoenix]

Corbyn's 2020 challenge, get on twitter and write these tweets :

 

"Labour Party fund = Zionist fund."

 

"A bit of banter really, couldn't resist."

 

"NO KEIR I'M NOT DELETING THE TWEET. Lighten up lad."

[cloggypop]

11 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/18/len-mccluskey-to-step-down-as-unite-leader-earlier-than-planned

 

I fully agree about the Unions having sway, but this should be what’s best for its members, completely, not to fight personal battles.

McCluskey denied reports that he would step down from his role earlier than expected. “My period in office finishes in April 2022 and I’ll be in charge until then,” 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/aug/01/unite-warns-labour-on-antisemitism-payouts

[sir roger]

9 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/18/len-mccluskey-to-step-down-as-unite-leader-earlier-than-planned

 

I fully agree about the Unions having sway, but this should be what’s best for its members, completely, not to fight personal battles.

I didnt see any personal battles being fought in the Guardian article I read. McClusleys two main points were that he would have no problem with Starmer if he kept to his 10 promises,  and that the reasoning behind the traitor payouts would have to be explained seeing as his union were basically paying for them.

[Bruce Spanner]

1 minute ago, sir roger said:

I didnt see any personal battles being fought in the Guardian article I read. McClusleys two main points were that he would have no problem with Starmer if he kept to his 10 promises,  and that the reasoning behind the traitor payouts would have to be explained seeing as his union were basically paying for them.

Seen the new article now.

 

Personal battles are that he, a Corbyn/RLB supporter, is using his platform to sew discord with the new leadership team.

 

If he believes that fine, it’s completely acceptable that it needs to be fully justified, but why take it to a national newspaper, why not keep it in-house? 
 

Too much dirty laundry and fondness for cosy interviews and press briefings. 

[sir roger]

You dont like him Bruce , I get it.

[Numero Veinticinco]

17 minutes ago, sir roger said:

As I've said before with the mandate he got he had a massive opportunity to take a middle way and bang heads together but practically every decision he has taken internally seems to be favouring the centrist / right of the party.

 

On the Traitor / Whistleblowers thing, I imagine with 9 separate claims there were differing levels of legal advice as to each case. I would have had no problem if settlements had been reached with some if the legal advice suggested it , but some of the people were quite blatantly and publicly antagonistic to the old regime and these cases should have been fought.

In your view they should have been fought. That’s fair enough and it might even be right if it was just a legal decision. Though we won’t know for sure. Starmer, with legal credentials surely nobody is stupid enough to deny, took a different view. That’s fair enough too. As a political decision, it’s a judgment call. I think it’s probably the right call politically, and I somewhat - which is to say, not strongly - agree that it is. There hasn’t yet been any real blow back because of it, there has been praise from some quarters and if the outcome is that Labour end this antisemitism fiasco then great. It’s very unlikely to cause some MPs to leave and start another party. 
 

The upcoming report and the actions taken on their recommendations are much more dangerous than this settlement thing. If the recommendation is to redraw the whip, then it’s serious decision time. Either way, this isn’t of Starmer’s making. Surely the most ardent opponent could admit that. 
 

Edit: I also find it weird that you criticising him for not finding the middle way and choosing to be centrist. I’d also be interested to hear what he has done that is right wing. I mean, actual right wing, not just view left wing people you don’t like. 

[Bruce Spanner]

9 minutes ago, sir roger said:

You dont like him Bruce , I get it.

Len?

 

Nah, he was great for a long time and for a lot of people, but I think he started to enjoy being on TV a bit too much and does himself, nor the union, any favours by doing so.

[Gnasher]

4 minutes ago, sir roger said:

You dont like him Bruce , I get it.

 

4 minutes ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

In your view they should have been fought. That’s fair enough and it might even be right if it was just a legal decision. Though we won’t know for sure. Starmer, with legal credentials surely nobody is stupid enough to deny, took a different view. That’s fair enough too. As a political decision, it’s a judgment call. I think it’s probably the right call politically, and I somewhat - which is to say, not strongly - agree that it is. There hasn’t yet been any real blow back because of it, there has been praise from some quarters and if the outcome is that Labour end this antisemitism fiasco then great. It’s very unlikely to cause some MPs to leave and start another party. 
 

The upcoming report and the actions taken on their recommendations are much more dangerous than this settlement thing. If the recommendation is to redraw the whip, then it’s serious decision time. Either way, this isn’t of Starmer’s making. Surely the most ardent opponent could admit that. 

"Labour end this anti semitism fiasco" you got to be joking, the court case might have ended it, this payout has not, the traitors are demanding the former labour leader be kicked out of the party, the leader of unite is threatening to withdraw funds. Good luck with the pipe dream.

[Gnasher]

The Tony Blair fan club boys are out in force today.

[Bruce Spanner]

3 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

The Tony Blair fan club boys are out in force today.

No, just long standing Labour members who are fucking tired of the pathetic mudslinging and self destruction.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Gnasher said:

 

"Labour end this anti semitism fiasco" you got to be joking, the court case might have ended it, this payout has not, the traitors are demanding the former labour leader be kicked out of the party, the leader of unite is threatening to withdraw funds. Good luck with the pipe dream.

The court case would have ended it?! Hahahaha. Okay babe. Back to bed. These ‘traitors’ can’t demand a fucking thing. Unite won’t withdraw a fucking thing. You’re talking out of your arse again.