First_Lexus

You don’t have to listen too carefully to hear the screech of brakes and metal colliding to realise you’re watching a huge car crash…

I don’t agree politically with virtually anything John McDonnell, Jeremy Corbyn and those on that wing of the Labour Party believe in. Not now anyway. However, I do believe they are sincere, and generally honest, unlike ‘new’ Labour whether that be Blair, Miliband, Mandelson, or Starmer. As for ‘shifting position’ we all have a political journey. As a student I mainly studied Labour and the left, civil rights movements in South Africa, India and Rhodesia, as well as European Union treaties and systems (EC as was) and US political history post Civil War. Fair to say, like all students should be, that I was ‘right on.’ Free Nelson Mandela. Resist student loans. I briefly met Tony Benn, still a hero of mine, and also Barbara Castle completely by chance. She was delightful company on a train I happened to get onto, really lovely and very interesting to speak with. She was also - whether sincerely or not - seemingly very interested in my political views. Given my studies and her part in Labour history it was a bit like my equivalent of meeting a pop star! My Father was an ‘old school’ Conservative, and had been a party doner. He was a member of what David Cameron called the ‘tie and blazer brigade.’ He told me I’d grow out of my left-wing phase, and he was right. He hated Margaret Thatcher, instead looking back to the golden age of titans like Macmillan, Anthony Eden and others. Anyway, along with adult life, the world of work, a mortgage and all that jazz my politics shifted. I have always considered myself a traditional Liberal, and over the years I’ve voted Labour, Liberal, Alliance (remember that?!), Conservative, Green (yes, really) and even UKIP in specific circumstances. Where do I think I am now? Still a liberal, probably slightly right of centre on most things but left of centre on others. I want to live in a tolerant and inclusive society, and I value meritocracy in terms of opportunity. I’m happy to pay slightly more tax if - and only if - I believe that money will be properly and sensibly spent. I’m not holding my breath on that one tbh… Anyway, that’s my political journey from awakening to now. Almost forty years of different opinions at different times. I think that’s how it should be.

^^ Labour Party membership for those who have retired is £2.88 pm so your £12 pa could discount it even further…😁

I’ve used the word before on this thread, but from a Labour Government, and one that was so adamant they’d be ‘corruption free’ to dissolve into this after only 8-12 weeks in power is disappointing for so many people. Perhaps not a surprise to those of us who’ve been around for more years than we’d care to mention, but trust has certainly been broken for many voters who lent Labour their vote this time. Jess Philips was no better with her ludicrous attempt at defending this debacle yesterday. She said she’d “…not received one message from a constituent…” about this scandal. John McDonnell on the radio this morning was pretty acerbic about that comment. Words to the effect, “…I’d never call a fellow MP a liar, but she must have very different constituents to me and other colleagues I’ve spoken with…” which was followed by the presenter saying, “…or perhaps her email is broken.” 😂

Agree, this is the wrong fight and shows either an arrogance or a stunning naivety. Actually I think it’ll be scandal that gets him. The problem with such public pronouncements about being without fault is that your own greed and incompetence comes back to bite… https://news.sky.com/story/sir-keir-starmer-declares-gifts-and-freebies-totalling-more-than-100-000-the-highest-of-any-mp-13217287 Sky News spent a good ten minutes on this story yesterday evening when it broke - a bit too late for the newspapers today but the weekend might be pretty brutal ahead of Labour Conference next week. Sky noted that even ‘Starmer loyalists’ were starting to distance themselves from him over this, and Sue Gray was firmly in the firing line (formally ethics advisor, what a farce). Funny thing though. The BBC news hasn’t really covered the story. How very strange…🤔

I suggest everybody looks up their own MP in the Register of Interests. This is the page for my MP who, let’s face it, is likely on a 5 year fixed term contract rather than an enduring role… https://members.parliament.uk/member/5337/registeredinterests

^^ I find it fascinating that politicians can clearly see such issues when they are in Opposition, but once they get into power the money, expenses and ability to ‘bend’ rules for their own financial benefit makes them blind. I’ve already noted how large sections of the media continue to fawn over Starmer’s fantastic ‘judgement’ as well as his ‘ethics’ and even ‘messianic destiny’ (Andrew Marr, what were you thinking 🤣). It’s that ‘my father was a toolmaker’ claptrap again. However, it’s becoming clear that his judgement is poor. The Winter Fuel Allowance has created a storm I don’t actually think he thought would be this severe. I’ll bet Labour thought this would be a couple of days of noise, then it would be forgotten. That’s poor political judgement. Then there’s the cronyism allegations, following on so rapidly from gaining power promising to ‘clean up’ politics. That’s poor political judgement too, and shows a level of contempt for both the truth and the electorate. Next, the donations used for his clothes and those for his wife. How on earth did he expect the public to react to an entitled and wealthy couple taking money like that while at the same time cutting the WFA for pensioners receiving a state pension as low as £11,500 a year? That’s poor ethical judgement. On this subject, fair play to Labour MP Rosie Duffield, who posted on X the story that Starmer may face an investigation over this issue with only the word ‘Change’ as her heading. Bravo! I could go back to his poor moral judgement at holding a pizza and beer event while COVID restrictions were in place. Anybody with a moral compass can see that event wasn’t really necessary - PR people like to speak about ‘optics’ - but Starmer did it anyway, evidently considering himself untouchable. He got away with it, but it was still questionable judgement. Finally, the recruitment of Sue Gray. That’s poor ethical judgement, as she - and Labour officials - broke Civil Service policies and standards. She would likely have been sanctioned but left the service to join Labour. I’m afraid that, rather than the boring and stable Prime Minister we were told we’d be getting, we’ve instead got a liar with judgement at least as poor as others in recent history. He himself said that Boris Johnson had “…an uncomfortable relationship with the truth.” Karma is a funny thing, Sir Keir…🤔😂😇

If we consider what Labour have done in their, admittedly very brief, time in office so far and compare with what they said in Opposition and during the election campaign, then I think we get our answer. - in Opposition, Labour admitted they expected to inherit the ‘worst fiscal situation since the war’; - in Opposition, Labour spoke about taxation in traditional Labour language. They said they’d protect ‘working people’, they spoke about windfall taxes on energy companies, non-doms, large corporations such as Amazon paying their ‘fair share’, banking bonuses etc. The electorate liked that, and there was a perceived difference between that approach and the Conservatives; - in Opposition, Labour said they’d restore ‘public service’ in Government, and would behave ethically and morally. They said they’d end ‘cronyism’ and scandal, and would deal with offences within their party swiftly if discovered. Let’s now look at three months of their Government; - the very FIRST THING they did, was claim surprise at the fiscal situation and target pensioners. Not the wealthy people they spoke about previously. Not the large corporations. Not even non-doms. Pensioners. That first statement is what will stick in people’s minds, and will rightly be used a a stick to beat Labour with for the next five years. I believe it was a significant miscalculation, but not one they can step away from without reminding the electorate about all their prior talk about Conservative ‘chaos’ and u-turns. Opposition is easy. Government is difficult; - turning to ‘cronyism’ they didn’t even have the sense to wait for a bit! Clearly believing the population to be incredible stupid, they gave Civil Service jobs to donors and supporters, and Lord Alli received a Downing Street pass. The signs were there for those willing to look, Sue Gray breaking the Civil Service code to go and work for Labour being exhibit A; - public service? This morning we hear that not only has Keir Starmer had his clothes paid for by Lord Alli, but his wife too…except his wife’s clothes weren’t declared. Ah, it’s just an oversight, nothing to see here they cry - except that previous Conservative ‘oversights’ in similar situations led to Labour howls for their resignation. Even using the word ‘oversight’ is odd, as it’s the same word used by their opponents previously, and to me that shows they’re either very naive, incredibly crass or just incompetent. On the BBC this morning David Lammy even tried to suggest that Keir Starmer ‘couldn’t afford’ to buy his own clothes which would ‘represent the country’ effectively on the world stage. The mind boggles… - integrity? Putting aside the donor clothing funding scandal, we’ve already had a Labour MP who seems to be a dodgy landlord. Was he suspended? Reprimanded perhaps? Nope, certainly not publicly. However, vote against the Government and you’ll have the whip withdrawn. The bar for standards in public life obviously isn’t that high for Keir Starmer… I could go on, but it’s depressing. The previous Conservative Government was poor. People did want change. What I think we’re seeing is greater ‘buyers remorse’ than I’ve ever witnessed after an election. That’s down to trust and integrity. They promised much, and are already failing to deliver. They KNEW the public finances were compromised - they’ve admitted that - but they didn’t mention Winter Fuel Payments, or Council Tax, or any of the other things they MUST have been considering. In my experience with friends and colleagues, most simply believe Starmer and Reeves are liars. In the end, it’s as simple as that.

I wrote to my (new) Labour MP three weeks ago (majority c1300 so doubt we’ll have to worry about her after the next four years). I am yet to even receive an acknowledgement. I did write on a number of issues, mainly the ‘cast iron pledges’ she made on her election website which were (strangely) removed immediately afterwards, but I did include concerns about the Winter Fuel Allowance, and potential removal of Council Tax single person discounts, and planning, and her position on accepting hospitality… …I added the last one as you can see accepted hospitality on the Register of Interests (.gov site) as well as how your MP voted on everything, written questions, spoken contributions to debates etc. Why did I ask that specific question? Simply because in a local TV interview pre-election she said she’d only accept hospitality where there was a ‘local benefit.’ I’m curious to know how four tickets to the Community Shield at Wembley for her and three members of her family fit into that category…value declared, £2800. Snouts in the trough as soon as they get their chance. Shame. SHAME! PS she voted for the cut to WFA, like any good Starmer supporting Labour drone should. She won’t last here, that’s my one crumb of comfort.

Well worth a watch to hear the views of two seasoned political campaigners, although I imagine Ed Balls has some fascinating discussions with wife Yvette Cooper 😂

I was interested to hear Liz Kendall (Work & Pensions), during the debate, try to suggest that people actually voted for measures like this during the election as they wanted Labour to ‘fix’ the economy. That is particularly brave/foolish (delete according to your political opinion) and pretty disingenuous. If they believe people will forget this then I hope they’re sorely mistaken.

Parliament has - unsurprisingly - approved the cut to Winter Fuel Allowance. A lot of Labour MPs must have abstained From Sky News; The result of the vote is: Yes (to cancel the cut): 228 No (to approve the cut): 348 Majority: 120

Don’t mis-understand me, I’m no lover of the BBC and their (to me) obvious left/centre left bias. Gaza/Israel seems to be an especially problematic area for them. My point was more that Government uses stories/issues like that to put one group against another and deflect attention from other matters. It’s the classic ‘look over there!’ That isn’t to say these aren’t important issues, just that with the cost of living crisis, mortgage rates, small boats, the Truss debacle etc. the Conservatives clearly stoked the BBC ‘story’, along with others, in order to distract. Just my opinion, obviously. Starmer seems to be using similar tactics to solidify his support base, safe in the knowledge that those who are offended/penalised by his policies such as the Winter Fuel Allowance - which remember ‘only’ saves £1.5bn - are distracted from public sector pay rises and likely further attacks in the budget, on freedom of speech…I could go on but it gets depressing.