The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

[Harpo]

I would argue that there have been no 'scandals', no 'sleaze', just a bit of good old-fashioned political naivety and incompetence... now, naivety and incompetence are not good qualities that one would want in a PM or in a Government, but they are not comparable with some of the utterly abhorrent stuff we have seen in previous governments in recent memory.

Starmer's government has had absolutely nothing on the scandal-scale to compare with, for example, Johnson's COVID parties.

And the rest. My post #3305 refers.

 

[sor]

I would argue that there have been no 'scandals', no 'sleaze', just a bit of good old-fashioned political naivety and incompetence... now, naivety and incompetence are not good qualities that one would want in a PM or in a Government, but they are not comparable with some of the utterly abhorrent stuff we have seen in previous governments in recent memory.

Starmer's government has had absolutely nothing on the scandal-scale to compare with, for example, Johnson's COVID parties.

It wasn't a good look for the government of service and party of change to immediately be embroiled in the freebie scandal, particularly when it came to football-related donations given that one of the flagship policies is to create a football industry regulator. The response was not "apologies, we won't do it again", it was various (awful) justifications as to why ministers needed their freebies. Not that much different to what the Tories would do, but at least we'd expect it from them

 

[Broucek]

I work for a regulated finance/professional services firms. There is a v low limit on receiving gifts and hospitality to avoid any hint of corruption. And any "perks" received as a consequence of my job are (quite rightly) taxable.

It's not obvious why similar rules don't apply to political leaders where the risk of "perks for influence" is so much higher.

As an aside, I once had to fill in a VERY detailed form when I gave a gift on behalf of the company to some "government officials". (The gift was posh biscuits for some not that senior people in a government-owned company.)

 

[Purple Train]

I find the whole Starmer/Mandelson thing a huge nonsense from the Westminster bubble.

I wonder whether it's simply a mistaken logic along the lines of:

Mandelson scandal similar to Pincher scandal
Mandelson's wrongdoing harmful to country
Mandelson's associates far worse than Pincher
Pincher scandal brought down Boris
Therefore Starmer must go

Now, obviously this logic has more holes in it than a piece of Emmental, but it is tempting, particularly given the current appetite for blood-letting in the Labour party (which, for what it's worth, I would mostly place on McSweeney).

I mean that Starmer obviously got it wrong and made a fool of himself, but he didn’t crash the economy, act as a lying hypocrite, and cause thousands more people to die than a competent PM would have done, to think of some of his recent predecessors.

Absolutely.

He made a stupid mistake and he’s owned up to it.

The decent and honourable thing to do, but of course we've had, for the five years before this government took office, a succession of premierships who have lied their way through mistakes and made them with such frequency that each one becomes a resigning matter. I don't think Starmer's at that stage yet, and if he chooses a decent chief of staff then things will improve, but he's testing my patience.

And the candidates to replace him aren’t exactly stunning, someone who broke the financial rules her department was responsible for, for example.

Which is pretty much Starmer and his team's fault thanks to their misguided attempts to reduce the Labour party to a single faction. Obviously I could name Labour MPs who I'd rather have in Number 10, but I'd be completely delusional to believe they could win a leadership election.

I certainly criticise Starmer for other incompetence since he became PM, but I don’t see how replacing him will improve anything for anyone.
I don’t cry over McSweeney’s departure, of course.

Agreed on both counts. I agree with Gordon Brown's analysis here - Starmer gets my vote of confidence for now, but if things don't improve now that McSweeney has gone, the writing will be on the wall.

 

[edwin_m]

I wonder whether it's simply a mistaken logic along the lines of:

Mandelson scandal similar to Pincher scandal
Mandelson's wrongdoing harmful to country
Mandelson's associates far worse than Pincher
Pincher scandal brought down Boris
Therefore Starmer must go

This would probably be a non-issue if not for all the resentment that has built up against Starmer, partly justified and partly stoked by interests that want him replaced by someone far worse.

 

[bleeder4]

It wasn't a good look for the government of service and party of change to immediately be embroiled in the freebie scandal, particularly when it came to football-related donations given that one of the flagship policies is to create a football industry regulator. The response was not "apologies, we won't do it again", it was various (awful) justifications as to why ministers needed their freebies. Not that much different to what the Tories would do, but at least we'd expect it from them

The current generation of politicians are all the same, regardless of which party they belong to. The concepts of honour and integrity have not been present in any part of Westminster for many years now.

 

[Purple Train]

This would probably be a non-issue if not for all the resentment that has built up against Starmer, partly justified and partly stoked by interests that want him replaced by someone far worse.

Well, exactly.

 

[SargeNpton]

Agreed on both counts. I agree with Gordon Brown's analysis here - Starmer gets my vote of confidence for now, but if things don't improve now that McSweeney has gone, the writing will be on the wall.

Gordon Brown, of course, being the one to ennoble Mandelson in 2008 to enable him to be brought back into government for the third time - after previously resigning twice due to other scandals. Has Brown ever apologised for that?

 

[Richard Scott]

Johnson’s covid ditherings certainly fit that description.

That's an opinion not fact. If things had been done differently do you have facts to back that up?

 

[Harpo]

That's an opinion not fact. If things had been done differently do you have facts to back that up?

Sorry. It’s fact. Baroness Hallet’s report stated quite clearly that Johnson’s ditherings enabled Covid to spread at pace.

Johnson's leadership style compounded problems as he "oscillated" on restrictions, enabling the virus to spread at pace, the report said.

While acknowledging the "profound" decisions he faced, Baroness Hallett concluded he delayed making choices when "timely decision-making was essential".

Johnson oversaw 'toxic culture' in No 10, inquiry finds

Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings and Matt Hanock are all criticised for contributing to poor Covid decision-making.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[1D54]

This would probably be a non-issue if not for all the resentment that has built up against Starmer, partly justified and partly stoked by interests that want him replaced by someone far worse.

Would it be possible to replace him with someone worse? I highly doubt it, leave him in place for a few months until after the local elections then drag him out kicking and screaming, call an election and put a party in who will by then be ready to sort out the bloody mess this lot have created.

 

[Railwaycat]

Would it be possible to replace him with someone worse? I highly doubt it, leave him in place for a few months until after the local elections then drag him out kicking and screaming, call an election and put a party in who will by then be ready to sort out the bloody mess this lot have created.

We've had some excellent, moderate, posts in the last 24 hours which I totally agree with.

It had to end sometime....

 

[styles]

Would it be possible to replace him with someone worse? I highly doubt it, leave him in place for a few months until after the local elections then drag him out kicking and screaming, call an election and put a party in who will by then be ready to sort out the bloody mess this lot have created.

Aye right. Which party would you put in which is ready to sort this mess out?

 

[edwin_m]

The current generation of politicians are all the same, regardless of which party they belong to. The concepts of honour and integrity have not been present in any part of Westminster for many years now.

I believe that's mostly incorrect and also incredibly damaging. "The others are just as bad" is a big part of Trump's playbook and that of his imitators in other countries.

Gordon Brown, of course, being the one to ennoble Mandelson in 2008 to enable him to be brought back into government for the third time - after previously resigning twice due to other scandals. Has Brown ever apologised for that?

From the paper edition (hence no link) of his article in the Guardian last Saturday:

I have to take personal responsibility for appointing Mandelson to his ministerial role in 2008... I thought that his unquestioned knowledge of Europe and beyond could help us as we dealt with the global financial crisis. I now know that I was wrong.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Angela Rayner making a public declaration in support of Starmer puts a lid on any talk of resignation or coups and rightly so. His choice over Mandelson was plain incompetence but thats all it is not the sleaze we saw from the Torys. The country needs stability not more chaos.

https://x.com/AngelaRayner/status/2020884865734832498

The recent scandal around Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein was shocking - and demands that both this government and our party learn the lessons, and act on them. But the worst possible response would be to play party politics or factional games. Labour is only getting started on changing things for the better - our Employment Rights Act, renters’ rights, leasehold reform, free school meals and lifting kids out of poverty. I urge all my colleagues to come together, remember our values and put them into practice as a team. The Prime Minister has my full support in leading us to that end.

 

[Richard Scott]

Sorry. It’s fact. Baroness Hallet’s report stated quite clearly that Johnson’s ditherings enabled Covid to spread at pace.

Johnson oversaw 'toxic culture' in No 10, inquiry finds

Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings and Matt Hanock are all criticised for contributing to poor Covid decision-making.

www.bbc.co.uk

So we go on one report.
Funny how Sweden did next to nothing and was no worse off. Anyway going off topic but don't think can claim he caused thousands of deaths (I'm no Johnson fan by any stretch).
Do you really think we could have 'controlled a virus'?

 

[Falcon1200]

Starmer's government has had absolutely nothing on the scandal-scale to compare with, for example, Johnson's COVID parties.

I'm not sure I agree with that; While Starmer could not have known the full extent of Mandelson's alleged misdeeds, his character and previous conduct were well known, to everyone. Yet Starmer still appointed him to a high level position, despite being warned not to.

 

[Gloster]

As I have said, there were logical reasons for appointing Mandelson. Trump is someone who adores flattery, was (even then) prone to changing his mind and loves to feel that he has made a deal, particularly one where he has done someone down. Mandelson is a master at handling these facets of Trump’s, or anybody’s character to his or, one hopes, his country’s advantage.

But he has one great disadvantage: he is Peter Mandelson. That should have automatically disbarred him from the position: but I fear that Starmer may have taken a little bit too much of the lawyer’s ‘innocent until proven guilty’ and ‘he has served his time’ attitude and failed to realise that deviousness is too deeply ingrained in Mandelson’s soul (if he has one).

It is not, in my opinion, enough to force Starmer’s resignation, as I don’t think that there is any scandal attaching to him. But it was a sufficiently serious misjudgement that he must buck his ideas up and get the country moving, and avoid a major scandal. Otherwise it will be a slow decline into stagnation.

 

[Harpo]

So we go on one report.

We'll only get one shot at formally questioning all of the major players from PM down to review how the government of the day operated.

Funny how Sweden did next to nothing and was no worse off. Anyway going off topic but don't think can claim he caused thousands of deaths (I'm no Johnson fan by any stretch).

Over to the covid deniers who might want to claim that it wasn't covid what done it. But, back in the real world if we accept that covid did cause deaths, and accept Hallet's conclusion that Johnson's inactions allowed the accelerated spread, it becomes very hard to deny that lives could have been spared.

Do you really think we could have 'controlled a virus'?

Not my call. But back to the Baroness who concluded that not enough was done quickly enough facilitating the accelerated spread.

 

[Richard Scott]

We'll only get one shot at formally questioning all of the major players from PM down to review how the government of the day operated.

Over to the covid deniers who might want to claim that it wasn't covid what done it. But, back in the real world if we accept that covid did cause deaths, and accept Hallet's conclusion that Johnson's inactions allowed the accelerated spread, it becomes very hard to deny that lives could have been spared.

Not my call. But back to the Baroness who concluded that not enough was done quickly enough facilitating the accelerated spread.

It might be but that's not scientific. You can't say for definite changing a parameter would have a definite outcome so, back to original statement, you can't blame Johnson for thousands of deaths. One report cannot definitively prove that other actions would have had a different outcome. Can speculate but never be sure.
It's nothing about being a denier or otherwise it's about reality. We'll never know true answers. One person coming to a conclusion is not scientific either. Report not really worth the paper it's written on.

 

[Broucek]

The COVID stuff is getting boring....

 

[jon0844]

I believe that's mostly incorrect and also incredibly damaging. "The others are just as bad" is a big part of Trump's playbook and that of his imitators in other countries.

But they are the same. Trump sends in ICE goons that kill US citizens, while Kamala Harris had an annoying laugh.

It's nearly impossible to choose.

 

[Harpo]

The COVID stuff is getting boring....

Point taken!

 

[Tester]

But they are the same. Trump sends in ICE goons that kill US citizens, while Kamala Harris had an annoying laugh.

It's nearly impossible to choose.

Where is the 'like' button?!

 

[Mag_seven]

Can we get back to discussing "The Labour Party Under Kier Starmer" please - I mean it's not as if there is nothing to discuss!

 

[londonbridge]

Would it be possible to replace him with someone worse?

It’s perfectly possible, the prospect of Angela Rayner or David Lammy as PM is ten times worse than Starmer.

 

[styles]

I'm not really confident in any of the would be front runners.

Streeting would be a very likely candidate and I think I'd prefer to keep Starmer at that point.

Virgin Bet are offering 500/1 on Blair though

 

[Harpo]

Streeting would be a very likely candidate and I think I'd prefer to keep Starmer at that point.

Yes. Streeting is like Starmer without the wit, flair and personality.

 

[styles]

Yes. Streeting is like Starmer without the wit, flair and personality.

I'm kinda happy with Starmer's boring personality. It's his policies and political direction I find lacking!

 

[BAFRA77]

So we go on one report.
Funny how Sweden did next to nothing and was no worse off. Anyway going off topic but don't think can claim he caused thousands of deaths (I'm no Johnson fan by any stretch).
Do you really think we could have 'controlled a virus'?

I quickly want to address this point - and we can then get back to business.

The Epidemiologist brought into the Swedish Health Ministry who wrote and pushed the Swedish model has since come out and said he was wrong.

Sweden's controversial decision not to impose a strict lockdown in response to the Covid-19 pandemic led to too many deaths, the man behind the policy, Anders Tegnell, has acknowledged.

Sweden has seen a far higher mortality rate than its nearest neighbours and its nationals are being barred from crossing their borders.

Dr Tegnell told Swedish radio more should have been done early on.

"There is quite obviously a potential for improvement in what we have done."

Sweden has counted 4,542 deaths and 40,803 infections in a population of 10 million, while Denmark, Norway and Finland have imposed lockdowns and seen far lower rates.

Denmark has seen 580 deaths, Norway has had 237 deaths and Finland 321. Sweden reported a further 74 deaths on Wednesday.

Coronavirus: Sweden's Tegnell admits too many died