The Fun Factory Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 Not sure what Starmer is playing out in creating internal fights for no reason. He has a open goal and I am afraid he could be doing a Diana Ross. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 From Starmer's perspective, there is a protocol of cabinet collective responsibility, and where a cabinet member publicly stands against the rest of the cabinet, removal from cabinet is the standard response. It perhaps wouldn't be necessary if the Labour party had any interests in supporting, or at least not opposing, the rights of workers to withdraw their Labour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 5 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: If it wasn't for the Starmer void - Mick wouldn't exist in the public eye. Sorry that isn't true Scott, Neil Kinnock was leader of the Labour Party that didn't stop Arthur Scargill and Derek Hatton getting column inch after column inch in the press (and Labour supported the Miners at the time) Mick Lynch exists, the press would not ignore him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said: Not sure what Starmer is playing out in creating internal fights for no reason. He has a open goal and I am afraid he could be doing a Diana Ross. Why did Starmer create the internal fight? Surely the person that went against party discipline for a Shadow Cabinet member was the one that caused this not Starmer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 1 minute ago, bickster said: Sorry that isn't true Scott, Neil Kinnock was leader of the Labour Party that didn't stop Arthur Scargill and Derek Hatton getting column inch after column inch in the press Mick Lynch exists, the press would not ignore him Different times I think. At the moment Mick Lynch is the only voice representing labour (small L) in the media, that shouldn't be the case, that's the job of the leader of the Labour party. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said: Different times I think. Not at all, the railworkers are the new miners, Lynch is the new Scargill (and Hatoon), Starmer is Kinnock The Parallels with 1983/5 are absolutely uncanny. Kinnock replaced the "too left" Michael Foot. The RMT are lead by a hard left Union Leader The railworkers are the new pawns in the game to replace the Miners It's the exact same thing, its harder to think of reasons why it's not exactly the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, bickster said: Not at all, the railworkers are the new miners, Lynch is the new Scargill (and Hatoon), Starmer is Kinnock The Parallels with 1983/5 are absolutely uncanny. Kinnock replaced the "too left" Michael Foot. The RMT are lead by a hard left Union Leader The railworkers are the new pawns in the game to replace the Miners It's the exact same thing, its harder to think of reasons why it's not exactly the same In between that, we've had Thatcherism, Reaganomics, the Washington consensus, the end of history and the corporate takeover of the political landscape. The idea that the left and right are in anywhere near the same positions as they were then is absurd! Starmer is nearer to Cameron than Kinnock. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 1 minute ago, bickster said: Kinnock replaced the "too left" Michael Foot. Here's Kinnock's Shadow Transport Secretary. Looks like this sort of thing was tolerated back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 11 minutes ago, Jareth said: Here's Kinnock's Shadow Transport Secretary. Looks like this sort of thing was tolerated back then. Was he making Labour Policy up on the spot? EDIT: This bit was wrong Prescot held the post twice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 31 minutes ago, bickster said: Not at all, the railworkers are the new miners, Lynch is the new Scargill (and Hatoon), Starmer is Kinnock The Parallels with 1983/5 are absolutely uncanny. Kinnock replaced the "too left" Michael Foot. The RMT are lead by a hard left Union Leader The railworkers are the new pawns in the game to replace the Miners It's the exact same thing, its harder to think of reasons why it's not exactly the same However we will still require a train service in the future , unlike the miners which were doomed to extinction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 18 minutes ago, bickster said: Was he making Labour Policy up on the spot? You mean like Rachel Reeves did - before Tarry the guy who got sacked corrected Labour's actual position? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MessiWillSignForVilla Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 32 minutes ago, bickster said: Was he making Labour Policy up on the spot? EDIT: This bit was wrong Prescot held the post twice You'd think a guy that helped spear his party's chances at getting elected by making up policy on the spot would have more tolerance for that kind of thing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icouldtelltheworld Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 14 hours ago, Ingram85 said: Does anyone else think Labour might be better off with Raynor at the helm? This would be like taking the captaincy of Tyrone Mings and giving it to John McGinn (Analogy doesn't really work, just couldn't miss the opportunity to make a topical Villa joke) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted July 28, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted July 28, 2022 2 hours ago, blandy said: It's just the point I'm making that he dodged a question, yet criticised Starmer for doing the same thing. You're right it's not his job to talk about other pay deals or Unions, nor is it, though, his job to talk about Starmer, a member (and leader) of another political party to his. RMT is not affiliated to Labour. It's my understanding that the RMT isn't associated with any political party. We're all going to see things as we want to. I see a glimmer of hope for a push back against the growing gap between the rich and the poor and it appears to be coming from unions. I also see a sense of awareness from the likes of Martin Lewis whos also speaks sense and is very media aware. Labour should be at least vocal about profits being fed down to the lower paid through pay deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 31 minutes ago, tinker said: It's my understanding that the RMT isn't associated with any political party. You'd be wrong then. It actually is the founding member of a party set up to fight elections. TUSC. It was set up by the RMT under Bob Crow. TUSC includes the RMT, The FBU the NUT and a few other Unions along with the Socialist Party (Mick Lynch's actual party) TUSC is literally it's creation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 14 hours ago, blandy said: . He’s good at the strategy stuff. Is that the strategy of saying and doing absolutely nothing? But you're right. If someone can tell him what to think, give him a steer, he'll be able implement a decent strategy around that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted July 28, 2022 Share Posted July 28, 2022 3 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: I think Mick is a symptom of people searching for something that looks and sounds like a leader of the Labour party and reflects the things they want. I'm sure there was a guy a couple of years ago that did that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 12 minutes ago, Jon said: Is that the strategy of saying and doing absolutely nothing? But you're right. If someone can tell him what to think, give him a steer, he'll be able implement a decent strategy around that. No. He definitely has got a strategy, a clear one. You or I might not approve of it, Jon, but it's hard to deny that he is pursuing an approach that concentrates on specific things (and avoids others). It's also the case that his type of strategy has in the past been fruitful for political parties in winning elections. That strategy is to concentrate (as I've written loads of times) on key kind of universal issues, to move Labour's reputation with the electorate from how it was seen last time (divided on Europe and Brexit, run by [whether true or not] someone weak on national security and Russia, someone sympathetic to the IRA and Hamas and Hezbollah and who had a bit of a problem with Jewish people and so on). The "under new leadership" stuff. He's chucked out some people, or demoted them for doing stuff that Corbyn would have been fine with, and he's been disciplined and occasionally disciplinarian. That's what he's done is unpopular with the far left of the Party is probably seen as a bonus electorally, in terms of winning over floating centrist voters and people fed up with the Tories who voted Tory last time. You're right that it can leave him looking like he's got nothing to say on stuff where we'd personally like him to say stuff, or behave differently. It's one reason why I'd have Angela Rainer as leader, or Andy Burnham (yes, I know he's not allowed to be, as he's not an MP). He's positioned himself and Labour as "a safe pair of hands, rule abiding, decent, competent" and avoided "radical, revolutionary, firebrand" type stuff - stuff that fires up a part of society and repels another part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 24 minutes ago, Jon said: I'm sure there was a guy a couple of years ago that did that. How did he get on in the election? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 28, 2022 Moderator Share Posted July 28, 2022 1 hour ago, tinker said: Labour should be at least vocal about profits being fed down to the lower paid through pay deals. Yes, they should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts