Will Keir Starmer last?

[brad465]

Exactly. He could quite easily ignore tackling the thorny and divisive topics of Brexit and Covid by focusing on the lies and corrupt behaviour. There are just so many examples of blatant lies and corruption. He could also begin to describe the arative around the Tory party beginning to dismantle our current society e.g. The NHS sell off, the planned demise of the BBC, selling of state capabilities to their mates. If I had a strategist and a speech writer I reckon I could put together a decent story here.

On top of that, the Tories have actually stolen some of Labour’s ground in respect of the Covid furlough scheme (i.e. “state handouts” as Tories would once have called it) and the first steps to renationalising the railways.

He also needs to actively call out the destructive ultra-left of the party. It’s the cabal that made Labour unelectable which is Loretta much a criminal offence for an opposition party. That boil needs lancing and the Trotskyites need to go and form their own revolution, comrade.

I sincerely hope that he’s playing a very long and clever game here but he needs to start making more of an impact to counter the “invisible” tag.

According to this latest article from the "finest journalist in the land", Laura Kuenssberg thinKs Labour's long term plan is to go after Cronyism and the like, albeit Greensill is the immediate focus (although the current administration is involved as well as Cameron):

Greensill: Labour's long-term plan to attack cronyism

Why Labour's push for a vote on a parliamentary inquiry in to Greensill is part of a long-term plan

www.bbc.co.uk

What former politicians, officials and advisers do with their lives after high office can be troublesome enough.

David Cameron's entanglement with the now failed bank, Greensill Capital, is a particularly acute example of a problem governments have grappled with for years, swearing all the while that they want to crack down on appalling behaviour, but never quite creating sets of rules or structures that would stamp it out.

The revelations about the former prime minister have pushed Boris Johnson to order a review of what happened even if, as we discussed on Monday night, it is likely to have been set up in part to spare the blushes of his current colleagues too.

What emerged on Tuesday, however, seems more curious still. A very senior civil servant (now departed) who had been in charge of huge amounts of Whitehall business, had actually gone to work for Greensill while he was still on the government payroll.

Yes, one of the impartial officials who was involved in decisions about government spending was, for a couple of months, working for a bank that wanted government business at the same time.

What might surprise you even more is that the official in question, Bill Crothers, was given permission to do so.

His boss, John Manzoni, who had, like him, spent decades in the private sector before going into government, had the responsibility of signing it off.

And, as Mr Crothers explicitly points out in a letter, his part-time move to Greensill had the backing of the Cabinet Office leadership at the time, and, as explained, was seen as part of his move back to the private sector.

The problem with making a transition or journey back to the private sector is that, for good reason, there is meant to be a strict separation between the two. There is meant to be practical and philosophical distance between what is business and what is politics.

You can read more about Bill Crothers's part in all this here. It is worth noting that the ethics watchdog, by publishing these letters, is perhaps learning to bite.

Its boss, the former cabinet minister Lord Pickles, may be worth a listen when he appears in front of MPs on Thursday.

Politically, this story does not start and end with Greensill or David Cameron. Labour is trying to build a broad attack on the Tories for indulging in cronyism, whether it is the former PM's lobbying, or pandemic PPE contracts, or however the prime minister's expensive wallpaper was actually paid for.

Its push for a vote on an inquiry into Greensill on Wednesday is part of a long-term game.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

According to this latest article from the "finest journalist in the land", Laura Kuenssberg thinKs Labour's long term plan is to go after Cronyism and the like, albeit Greensill is the immediate focus (although the current administration is involved as well as Cameron):

Greensill: Labour's long-term plan to attack cronyism

Why Labour's push for a vote on a parliamentary inquiry in to Greensill is part of a long-term plan

www.bbc.co.uk

That wouldn't surprise me, but I think voters would be more sensitive to MPs like David Lammy or Diane Abbot saying something about going back into Europe than Tory cronyism.

 

[Typhoon]

It's still a long time until the next general election.
Kier Starmer is (having to) play a long game, with Brexit and Covid dictating events for now.
I'd wait judgement on him for another year or so personally.

So true. I would give him a little longer than that, many appear to underestimated the loss in 2019 and seem to have expected a quick recovery, just like Labour did in 2010 and the Tories in 1997. Two groups appear to be spearheading the call for Starmer to go - the extreme left who seem to want a Corbynista back (Burgon, Long-Bailey - ages since I've seen her) who will have all the baggage of 2019 but will lack Corbyn's passion and oratory; the right wing press want someone they can attack, at the moment all they can pick on are a few minor blemishes (Angela Rayner needs to be careful, although she appears to be growing in to the role) while ignoring Johnson's blatant concoctions which pass the Pinocchio test with regularity.

That wouldn't surprise me, but I think voters would be more sensitive to MPs like David Lammy or Diane Abbot saying something about going back into Europe than Tory cronyism.

I disagree; the Brexit boat has sailed, Labour has to work on how the Johnson deal has gone wrong. Not with the aim of going back in but to undermine his position, just like the cronyism. Keep chipping away. Lammy is best kept to his brief of Justice, the shadow ministers they need to speak out are those with a different voice, who represent different regions or nations of the UK. Lammy, Abbot and Starmer represent the capital, there are not many more seats to be won there (and Abbot is neither a shadow minister, nor totally reliable); Ashworth, for instance, still has traces of his accent and appears to have fared well. Labour needs to push more like him to the fore.

 

[brad465]

I disagree; the Brexit boat has sailed, Labour has to work on how the Johnson deal has gone wrong. Not with the aim of going back in but to undermine his position, just like the cronyism. Keep chipping away. Lammy is best kept to his brief of Justice, the shadow ministers they need to speak out are those with a different voice, who represent different regions or nations of the UK. Lammy, Abbot and Starmer represent the capital, there are not many more seats to be won there (and Abbot is neither a shadow minister, nor totally reliable); Ashworth, for instance, still has traces of his accent and appears to have fared well. Labour needs to push more like him to the fore.

They also need to push Deputy Rayner more, along with Nandy if they want more outside the capital representation, as they both have northern seats and regional accents to go with them. Miliband has been well pushed and is in a northern seat too, although question marks may hang over him for some given he once ran the party and lost an election. Rachel Reeves is of London origin but her seat is Leeds West, so maybe a compromise of the two areas, but in any case she's been very front facing in regularly calling out both Brexit problems and cronyism/corruption.

 

[takno]

They also need to push Deputy Rayner more, along with Nandy if they want more outside the capital representation, as they both have northern seats and regional accents to go with them. Miliband has been well pushed and is in a northern seat too, although question marks may hang over him for some given he once ran the party and lost an election. Rachel Reeves is of London origin but her seat is Leeds West, so maybe a compromise of the two areas, but in any case she's been very front facing in regularly calling out both Brexit problems and cronyism/corruption.

I think Milliband's main problem was that as leader he let the various factions drag him in too many directions, and it was too easy to paint him as the worst of all worlds. He's a lot better at being in a cabinet role.

The main risk for me with promoting the northern MPs is that you end up promoting Liz Kendall. Her terrible leadership campaign gave Corbyn all the ammunition he needed to get elected against two other relatively decent candidates. She's consistently failed to stick to a single principle since then, and her unconsidered demeaning of shop-workers this week was an absolute masterclass in pointless unforced errors.

 

[Typhoon]

I think Milliband's main problem was that as leader he let the various factions drag him in too many directions, and it was too easy to paint him as the worst of all worlds. He's a lot better at being in a cabinet role.

The main risk for me with promoting the northern MPs is that you end up promoting Liz Kendall. Her terrible leadership campaign gave Corbyn all the ammunition he needed to get elected against two other relatively decent candidates. She's consistently failed to stick to a single principle since then, and her unconsidered demeaning of shop-workers this week was an absolute masterclass in pointless unforced errors.

I, too, have been quite impressed with Milliband in his new role. He was promoted too earlier, as is often the case nowadays (Hague was a pretty solid Foreign Secretary), his accent is still Lundun though.

Kendall is a long way down the food chain and Leicester is hardly 'the north', it is either just north or just south of the middle of England (depending on the measure you use) and she is definitely 'Home Counties'. The only thing in her favour is that she is shadowing Helen Whately, who, unaccountably, the Tories keep rolling out to do interviews when they are inevitably a 'car crash'.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

Not sure that anyone (including Starmer) can get the better of Johnson at PMQ's, he just lies and obfuscates...I thought
Johnson got a good one in today, noting how Starmer was now being advised by Lord Mandelson of all people he quipped:

“Perhaps in the interest of full transparency, Lord Mandelson can be encouraged to disclose his other clients Mr Speaker,” .

 

[Purple Orange]

Not sure that anyone (including Starmer) can get the better of Johnson at PMQ's, he just lies and obfuscates...I thought
Johnson got a good one in today, noting how Starmer was now being advised by Lord Mandelson of all people he quipped:

“Perhaps in the interest of full transparency, Lord Mandelson can be encouraged to disclose his other clients Mr Speaker,” .

Am I the only one not impressed by Johnson at PMQs? It’s just plain drivel coming out of his mouth and I don’t see what he is gaining. He’s on the crest of the vaccine wave but that won’t last forever. 12 months ago, when the polls had the Tories with 55%, people were losing their **** about Labour having no chance, with folk rabbiting on like we’ll have a Tory government for decades. Corbyn royally screwed up and it was a tanker lost at sea. My analogy is more of a four and half year journey to guide that tanker back in to port - there is another 3 years to go yet.

 

[takno]

Am I the only one not impressed by Johnson at PMQs? It’s just plain drivel coming out of his mouth and I don’t see what he is gaining. He’s on the crest of the vaccine wave but that won’t last forever. 12 months ago, when the polls had the Tories with 55%, people were losing their **** about Labour having no chance, with folk rabbiting on like we’ll have a Tory government for decades. Corbyn royally screwed up and it was a tanker lost at sea. My analogy is more of a four and half year journey to guide that tanker back in to port - there is another 3 years to go yet.

I think Johnson has learned well from Trump that you can fool half the people half the time, and that's broadly plenty. I do sometimes wish that Starmer would realise that being in the right isn't even half the battle

 

[Cowley]

I think Johnson has learned well from Trump that you can fool half the people half the time, and that's broadly plenty. I do sometimes wish that Starmer would realise that being in the right isn't even half the battle

That’s so well said.

 

[507021]

Am I the only one not impressed by Johnson at PMQs?

Nope, as well as myself (Labour supporter) I know of some disillusioned Tories who are utterly embarrassed by Johnson full stop.

I have to admit I took great pleasure in telling them "I told you so".

 

[brad465]

Am I the only one not impressed by Johnson at PMQs? It’s just plain drivel coming out of his mouth and I don’t see what he is gaining. He’s on the crest of the vaccine wave but that won’t last forever. 12 months ago, when the polls had the Tories with 55%, people were losing their **** about Labour having no chance, with folk rabbiting on like we’ll have a Tory government for decades. Corbyn royally screwed up and it was a tanker lost at sea. My analogy is more of a four and half year journey to guide that tanker back in to port - there is another 3 years to go yet.

Yes the reality is the Government are still benefitting from the "rally around the leader" effect that almost always occurs during a national crisis (which is why that 55% polling happened), but many other Labour supporters can't see that. Once the pandemic is over they need to outline a strong vision of where they want to go, allow the party to scrutinise it to make it better and keep exposing Tory problems (like with Greensill at the moment), then Labour may well be in a better place.

 

[tbtc]

Yes the reality is the Government are still benefitting from the "rally around the leader" effect that almost always occurs during a national crisis (which is why that 55% polling happened), but many other Labour supporters can't see that

Good point.

I think that (after years of the IRA and Islamist terrorism, plus the English fixation with the Second World War), the natural reaction in the UK is the kind of "stiff upper lip, no surrender, keep calm and carry on" - which meant being patriotic and humble and not wanting to cause a fuss when the virus started (rather than, say, instigating a lockdown and maybe not shaking hands with people in hospital beds...)

Now that this period is coming to an end, there'll be a brief period of boost as people are able to return to work/ see relatives/ get back to the pub. But after that, Johnson is going to have to actually *govern*.

This far, his leadership has been taken up with Brexit, election, more Brexit, Coronavirus... he's been able to distract. I'm sure he'll keep trying to generate some phony culture war stuff (flags, gypsies, poppies, bridges to Ireland etc) but this is where Johnson is weak. He's not a details man, he's not got much enthusiasm for common-or-garden Government (which is why his Mayoralty was full of distractions like the Garden Bridge) - this is where Starmer stands his best chance - he just needs to wait for Johnson to lose interest and get sloppy (which, given that the Cabinet is full of yes-men, selected for loyalty rather than skills, will happen)

It's hard for the Leader Of The Opposition to make much ground during times of crisis (which is why leaders - nationwide - like to engineer foreign policy drama) - it's been a tough year for Starmer. I think that he's shown that he's learnt why Corbyn lost twice - I'm not sure that he's yet shown why Blair won three times - he doesn't have the "pizzazz" - but it'll be a lot easier for him to trip Johnson up once life is back to normal and the PM runs out of "ooh, look over there" distractions

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Good point.

I think that (after years of the IRA and Islamist terrorism, plus the English fixation with the Second World War), the natural reaction in the UK is the kind of "stiff upper lip, no surrender, keep calm and carry on" - which meant being patriotic and humble and not wanting to cause a fuss when the virus started (rather than, say, instigating a lockdown and maybe not shaking hands with people in hospital beds...)

Now that this period is coming to an end, there'll be a brief period of boost as people are able to return to work/ see relatives/ get back to the pub. But after that, Johnson is going to have to actually *govern*.

This far, his leadership has been taken up with Brexit, election, more Brexit, Coronavirus... he's been able to distract. I'm sure he'll keep trying to generate some phony culture war stuff (flags, gypsies, poppies, bridges to Ireland etc) but this is where Johnson is weak. He's not a details man, he's not got much enthusiasm for common-or-garden Government (which is why his Mayoralty was full of distractions like the Garden Bridge) - this is where Starmer stands his best chance - he just needs to wait for Johnson to lose interest and get sloppy (which, given that the Cabinet is full of yes-men, selected for loyalty rather than skills, will happen)

It's hard for the Leader Of The Opposition to make much ground during times of crisis (which is why leaders - nationwide - like to engineer foreign policy drama) - it's been a tough year for Starmer. I think that he's shown that he's learnt why Corbyn lost twice - I'm not sure that he's yet shown why Blair won three times - he doesn't have the "pizzazz" - but it'll be a lot easier for him to trip Johnson up once life is back to normal and the PM runs out of "ooh, look over there" distractions

Generally a pretty good post and spot on. One minor quibble - I wouldn't say the culture war is either phony or being generated only by the Conservatives. I'd argue it's very real - and as much generated by the actions of people on the left. Case in point - in how many countries would the Government flying the country's own flag on public buildings be remotely controversial? I'd guess, not many: That really should be a complete non-issue, and it wouldn't be an issue except that so many on the left and in the Labour Party seem to be uncomfortable with displays of patriotism. Bridges to Ireland - yeah I agree with you that's a bit daft in terms of how the economics don't add up, but that's got more to do with Boris's tendency to dream up impractical infrastructure than anything to do with culture. And I doubt there are many votes in that one anyway.

Keir Starmer has mostly steered away from anything to do with culture wars. I think that's wise - he seems to have (correctly IMO) realised that there are far more votes for the Tories than for Labour in those kinds of issues. I think his problem though is that he has a lot of MPs and party members who are not so disciplined and whose opinions on cultural issues are likely to put off a lot of centrist/moderate voters.

 

[Busaholic]

The present configuration of the Commons, with so few Members or even Ministers present, is a significant obstacle for an Opposition leader trying to land punches on the shameless P.M., not helped by the predictable uselessness of the Speaker, a ''Buggins turn'' candidate if ever there was one, in at least trying to cajole him to provide answers to Questions.

 

[tbtc]

Generally a pretty good post and spot on. One minor quibble - I wouldn't say the culture war is either phony or being generated only by the Conservatives. I'd argue it's very real - and as much generated by the actions of people on the left. Case in point - in how many countries would the Government flying the country's own flag on public buildings be remotely controversial? I'd guess, not many: That really should be a complete non-issue, and it wouldn't be an issue except that so many on the left and in the Labour Party seem to be uncomfortable with displays of patriotism. Bridges to Ireland - yeah I agree with you that's a bit daft in terms of how the economics don't add up, but that's got more to do with Boris's tendency to dream up impractical infrastructure than anything to do with culture. And I doubt there are many votes in that one anyway.

Keir Starmer has mostly steered away from anything to do with culture wars. I think that's wise - he seems to have (correctly IMO) realised that there are far more votes for the Tories than for Labour in those kinds of issues. I think his problem though is that he has a lot of MPs and party members who are not so disciplined and whose opinions on cultural issues are likely to put off a lot of centrist/moderate voters.

That's a good point about the flags - as someone who still self-identifies as being on the "left" (or did before Corbyn made it increasingly hard to accept all of the baggage that being left of centre entails nowadays!), it's a bit silly the way that so many people on the left fall for the elephant traps that the likes of Johnson lay about irrelevant things like flags - as a Scot in England I'm not a fan of any politician who wraps themselves up in flags (whether Sturgeon, Foster or Johnson) but I can accept that there are millions of people in the country who are patriotic and that any party wanting to get into Government has to at least get past the "being embarrassed of the flag" stage (although not to the weird flag-hugging thing that Trump was doing!). Similarly, I wouldn't want a statue of anyone up in my garden, but I can respect those who do value statues.

I just worry that we are going to have a political future where the Government want to keep us arguing amongst ourselves on things like statues/ poppies/ Pride flags etc than any proper debate about the economy - you're right that Starmer seems to be trying to focus on the important thing but his problem is that it's easy for the Daily Mail etc to find *someone* on the left saying something disparaging about flags etc and suggest that "LABOUR HATES BRITAIN", when it's really more a case of "Owen Jones Falls Into Every Trap That The Media Lay For Him And Provides Soundbites That Allow Them To Portray Everyone On The Left As Wanting To Knock Down Statues Of Churchill". Unfortunately, the Westminster voting system means that there's nowhere for the far left to go, so the right can portray all of "the left" as being represented by one faction.

 

[brad465]

This particular act by Starmer seems to be getting high coverage, where I can't work out whether it was a good idea or not for Starmer to do:

Starmer says he is proud to support John Lewis after Tory criticism of photo op

The Labour leader hits back at Tory criticism of his wallpaper department photo opportunity.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Conservatives have criticised Sir Keir Starmer for visiting a John Lewis store to make a dig at the PM over the Downing Street redecoration row.

Tory chair Amanda Milling said the Labour leader was "playing politics" by posing with rolls of wallpaper in a branch in Greater Manchester.

The funding of recent Downing Street flat renovations is being investigated.

Sir Keir has urged Boris Johnson to reveal "quickly" who initially paid the bill for the work.

But the prime minister said he would cooperate with the investigations, adding: "I don't think there is anything to see here or worry about."

Questions over the funding of the Downing Street flat refurbishment - overseen by Mr Johnson's fiancée Carrie Symonds and reported to have cost up to £200,000 - have dominated the headlines for several days.

The Electoral Commission is investigating, as are the UK's top civil servant and the prime minister's own standards adviser.

What I would say with confidence though is nobody in charge or a significant part of any major party can take the moral highground on accusing another party of playing "Party politics", as by definition all political parties do it and will continue to. How that's perceived though won't unfortunately match.

 

[tbtc]

This particular act by Starmer seems to be getting high coverage, where I can't work out whether it was a good idea or not for Starmer to do:

Starmer says he is proud to support John Lewis after Tory criticism of photo op

The Labour leader hits back at Tory criticism of his wallpaper department photo opportunity.

www.bbc.co.uk

What I would say with confidence though is nobody in charge or a significant part of any major party can take the moral highground on accusing another party of playing "Party politics", as by definition all political parties do it and will continue to. How that's perceived though won't unfortunately match.

I wouldn't have heard of it if it weren't for Tories complaining about it so much in my timeline.

We all know that Johnson loves nothing better than a photo-op, any chance to don some hi-vis and prance about for the cameras - which is possibly why they seem so stung by the "other guys" doing it - maybe they're used to Labour leaders playing things "straight" and a bit rattled?

It's a cheap stunt, sure, but this whole farrago seems designed for the Leader Of The Opposition - for a large proportion of the population John Lewis is at the upper end of aspiration (it's where you have your Wedding List but not somewhere you regularly shop), so for the PM to be seen to be sneering at John Lewis allows Starmer to be photographed there and more "in touch" I guess. Especially as the cost of "revamping" a fairly small flat (that was refurbed under the previous occupant) is costing more than most people's houses.

I suppose the simple picture allows the story to run a bit longer - it's a nice visual image that will get people talking about it for another couple of days

 

[birchesgreen]

I don't get the criticism that a politician is "playing politics", isn't that the job?

I find interesting the Tories are attacking Labour so hard for going on about Johnson's wallpaper and refurbishing, saying the public aren't interested. Well if so then surely that would be a good thing for the Tories.

 

[takno]

This particular act by Starmer seems to be getting high coverage, where I can't work out whether it was a good idea or not for Starmer to do:

Starmer says he is proud to support John Lewis after Tory criticism of photo op

The Labour leader hits back at Tory criticism of his wallpaper department photo opportunity.

www.bbc.co.uk

What I would say with confidence though is nobody in charge or a significant part of any major party can take the moral highground on accusing another party of playing "Party politics", as by definition all political parties do it and will continue to. How that's perceived though won't unfortunately match.

I thought the whole line was a bit pathetic tbh. Going after 50k of slightly dodgy refurbishment money, rather than the dodgy Covid billions. Feels like he doesn't want to go after that because it threatens his precious lockdown, and his wife will send him to bed with no supper.

On the other hand the Tories have really risen to the occasion, and it's working out a treat.

 

[Gloster]

I thought the whole line was a bit pathetic tbh. Going after 50k of slightly dodgy refurbishment money, rather than the dodgy Covid billions. Feels like he doesn't want to go after that because it threatens his precious lockdown, and his wife will send him to bed with no supper.

On the other hand the Tories have really risen to the occasion, and it's working out a treat.

The billions spent on dodgy contracts are just massive sums that are completely beyond many people’s ability to comprehend. Yes, they know that a lot of money has been wasted but it is too far from their experience. A ludicrously expensive (and hardly necessary) flat refurbishment using ridiculously expensive wallpaper is something that people can relate to.

 

[Cowley]

I thought the whole line was a bit pathetic tbh. Going after 50k of slightly dodgy refurbishment money, rather than the dodgy Covid billions. Feels like he doesn't want to go after that because it threatens his precious lockdown, and his wife will send him to bed with no supper.

On the other hand the Tories have really risen to the occasion, and it's working out a treat.

I agree with this. But...

The billions spent on dodgy contracts are just massive sums that are completely beyond many people’s ability to comprehend. Yes, they know that a lot of money has been wasted but it is too far from their experience. A ludicrously expensive (and hardly necessary) flat refurbishment using ridiculously expensive wallpaper is something that people can relate to.

I also agree with this and the two things are intertwined.
Clearly they’d rather the attention was on the price of wallpaper than the absolute scandal that @takno mentions (which they should be being wholly taken to pieces over at the moment).

 

[brad465]

I agree with this. But...


I also agree with this and the two things are intertwined.
Clearly they’d rather the attention was on the price of wallpaper than the absolute scandal that @takno mentions (which they should be being wholly taken to pieces over at the moment).

I agree in part they need to push it more, but so far when they've brought dodgy PPE up it hasn't got through those not already against Johnson. The Dyson texts row was a sub-plot to this, but somehow Johnson was able to dress it up as Starmer criticising their ventilator delivery, when no ventilators were actually delivered, the problem was Dyson trying to cheat the tax system as a crony of Johnson. Also one advantage of focusing on wallpaper is it seems to be where the media is focused against Johnson, which they haven't been with PPE.

The other problem is this whole "rally around the leader" concept that occurs whenever there's a national crisis. It's hard to be critical during such circumstances, and until the pandemic is in a much quieter phase and/or over, it's difficult to act as a credible alternative. This will be too late for next week's elections; late summer/autumn would theoretically be when this effect will subside.

 

[tbtc]

I thought the whole line was a bit pathetic tbh. Going after 50k of slightly dodgy refurbishment money, rather than the dodgy Covid billions. Feels like he doesn't want to go after that because it threatens his precious lockdown, and his wife will send him to bed with no supper

I'd respectfully disagree.

Without trying to sound unduly patronising, a lot of people don't pay much attention to national economics. Does the man on the Clapham Omnibus know whether the cost of the pandemic is a thousand pounds/ five thousand pounds/ ten thousand pounds per head of the population? I don't know - it's millions and billions and numbers so big that it's hard to relate.

Look at what did for Labour in the Gordon Brown era - people might not have understood how the global financial meltdown meant all the inter-connected problems caused all the economic damage the they did...

...but we understood MP expenses - we might not have known how derivatives or credit swaps worked but we knew when someone was taking the mickey by ordering an item of furniture that we could have bought for a fraction of the price.

Plus, people can justify some of the crazy procurement that's taken place over the past twelve months - "the Government were in a crisis, of course they are going to go to people they trust, they were desperate, I can forgive them paying over the odds to try to keep people safe" (even thought there's clearly been a huge overspend and some rather "shady" purchases - e.g. the insistence on using Brexit backing people/ companies like Dyson and JCB when established ventilator companies couldn't get a foot in the door) - however there's no reason for the flat refurbishment (it was done under May so must all be pretty modern, and Johnson was meant to be focussing on the pandemic rather than house refurbishment), so there's a lot less to hide behind.

So people will understand the economics of refurbishing a flat (and see a PM who is seen to diss our beloved John Lewis) and you can criticise the flat refurbishment without being seen to be "Talking Britain Down" (which is how the Tories like to portray any general criticism), so it seems like the better story to keep going for now.

I don't know whether our trade deficit is high or low, but I do know what seems overpriced for a lamp/ chair/ table etc - talk to me about something I can relate to.

The huge sums of money wasted during Covid can be brought up over the next year or two - it may even become a bigger story as the dust settles and the invoices become public - whilst the trendy wallpaper story has limited life in it, so focus on the wallpaper for now and save your fire on the other story for the medium term.

Starmer seems a lot cannier than his opponents seem to take him at - he's avoiding the kind of traps that Corbyn would have stumbled into and is good at picking the right targets (sometimes Milliband was very unfocussed)

The billions spent on dodgy contracts are just massive sums that are completely beyond many people’s ability to comprehend. Yes, they know that a lot of money has been wasted but it is too far from their experience. A ludicrously expensive (and hardly necessary) flat refurbishment using ridiculously expensive wallpaper is something that people can relate to.

Agreed - You've put it better than me!

 

[takno]

Starmer seems a lot cannier than his opponents seem to take him at - he's avoiding the kind of traps that Corbyn would have stumbled into and is good at picking the right targets (sometimes Milliband was very unfocussed)

I'd certainly agree with all of that. He's a smarter political operator than I am, and I'm not sure either Corbyn or Milligan's & team met that rather low bar.

I'm just a bit disappointed because there's so much very big to focus on, and frankly I could do with getting interested in some politics, and the small stuff is so boring.

The flashes of actual conviction disturb me as well. He seems so bought into the innate saintliness of the NHS and medical profession, and completely immune to any real empathy for the millions of lives lockdown is destroying.

 

[Cowley]

I'd certainly agree with all of that. He's a smarter political operator than I am, and I'm not sure either Corbyn or Milligan's & team met that rather low bar.

I'm just a bit disappointed because there's so much very big to focus on, and frankly I could do with getting interested in some politics, and the small stuff is so boring.

The flashes of actual conviction disturb me as well. He seems so bought into the innate saintliness of the NHS and medical profession, and completely immune to any real empathy for the millions of lives lockdown is destroying.

I completely agree.

 

[birchesgreen]

Criticising the NHS and medical profession would be (as they would say in Yes Minister) a courageous move.

 

[takno]

Criticising the NHS and medical profession would be (as they would say in Yes Minister) a courageous move.

It's not a case of criticising it. In some ways the way he trots out his wife, who works in the NHS, is like a human shield. Everybody is grateful for the good work the NHS has done, but we aren't a medicocracy. I'm genuinely not sure Keir gets that

 

[birchesgreen]

Na mate, anything perceived as being against the NHS especially right now is basically akin to a clown dancing over a minefield. Personally it shouldn't be but both sides have made the NHS the state religion for various reasons.

 

[nlogax]

I admire Keir Starmer. He's competent, intelligent and a massive improvement on the liability that lead Labour before him. His problem is the wider party who appear discontent and rudderless even with an actual leader running the shop.

Worth also pointing out that it's doubtful Starmer would outlast Boris Johnson who - even in the stickiest of moments with a ton of negative press - isn't likely to be leaving No.10 any time soon.