A rebel Labour MP speaks out about the 'end of days' feeling gripping Keir Starmer's party as the Prime Minister's advisers enact a campaign of revenge against their left flank
Agreed in a way. Lawyers are based on written case law and acts of parliament. So in general there is not a lot of debate. Whereas in normal business teams will have differing views and no principles to follow. So listening, building on other people’s ideas, and reaching a consensus is necessary.
Thanks for the explanation. I agree with almost everything you said in it except that in normal business there won't be principles to follow. Every business has some kind of organising conceptual framework. Some businesses make it explicit and talk about their values but that doesn't mean that the ones that don't overtly talk about values don't have them.
Prosecutors do not function as lone wolves or sole traders. They will have teams around them just like the defence. It seems they are not team players because we see them on their feet solo in court but that is t the whole job. If Starmer isn't a team player, that is down to his character rather than his professional formation.
To a degree. I worked in company with strong quaker values. Ou work was develp[ing software matahced to requirements for customers. There was a lot of discussion around design choices and options of different ways to do things. Sometimes passionate.
I'm not a Labour supporter but right now they are the best bet for the country. However their day to day management is questionable as Highlighted here. There have been so many false steps it suggests that McSweeney should go.
If Tories are no longer the party of power, I can’t help feeling that this is just a way to create a party that no longer represents the Left in a FPTP two party system which is fracturing anyway. It’s not just the “hard left” (a term I hate) they want to suppress now.
I suppose I started out being “soft left” as they would put it and look how that’s turning out? I saw Jess Phillips talk about how Labour MPs should act as a team (not rebelling) and I just thought, team work entails working together, listening to MPs who by the way represent the voters they made promises to. Not strong arming them into submission. This govt will continue to become unpopular. No question. If they keep going like this. I just don’t feel they represent me and I’ve been a Labour voter all my life.
There is a similarity with Boris Johnson in 2019. Keen to get his version of Brexit through he purged the Conservatives of dissent. New candidates had to be loyal to Johnson.
Starmer’s ongoing purges seem to be similar. Personal loyalty over principle.
Of course, if you are in a party you should expect to vote on the party line. Assuming the policy has wide agreement.
The British system, up until recently, has been large parties defined by broad principles. Policies thrashed out internally to deal with the needs of left and right.
Having narrower parties defined by a more limited set of boundaries means hollowing out the existing framework. It means more parties outside the big parties. Sniping from specific left or right perspectives.
It doesn’t mean that the left has wholly disappeared from Labour. It just means that the political space Keir Starmer seems to occupying is more to the centre right. More like the paternalistic instincts of the Conservatives pre-Thatcher.
It leaves an opening on the left and centre left. Whether parties in that space can devise an effective offer is up in the air.
Ending broad parties does mean the remainder are scrapping around for20-30% of the vote rather than the expectations that big parties attract north of 35% of the vote.
it's interesting comparing this to Patrick Maguire's version of the same events in the Times, which paints a very different and in my view entirely unconvincing picture.
Complete bollocks from people who have been raised on workers revolution and will settle for nothing else. Gaining office and discovering there are no quick fixes is a time honoured process for social democrats. Yes, join the clamour for an end to Starmer's leadership but only Reform will benefit.
You’d need a heart of stone not to laugh at a Labour Party that elected a man of no known principles and a cabinet captured by corporate interests and big money. Hence LINO, Labour in name only.
But Labour’s end of times and the Tory kamikazes is merely a symptom of a far greater malaise that encompasses the voting system, the power of The Party, a professional political class who owe nothing to the concept of public service.
We have a government elected by 33% of those who voted, which is 20% of those on the electoral register and when you take account of possibly 8million not properly registered means Labour’s landslide was supported by maybe 15% of all those eligible to vote. We have Hogg’s elective dictatorship supported by a tiny number of citizens.
I don’t call that democracy and it’s time journalists and others started questioning the legitimacy of a government that the vast majority didn’t vote for. And the tragedy for the UK is that there will be no change in this system of de facto dictatorship for the foreseeable future.
Hello Elizabeth, I didn’t mean “class” in that sense. I meant in the sense that these are people who have done very little outwith politics. They may do politics at university (the Oxbridge set do PPE), they become a researcher, a SPAD, a councillor and inch their way up the greasy pole till they get a seat in parliament. Mind you there are a few political “dynasties” even now - Benn, Miliband, Kinnock…
Why call them a class? It makes it sound as if you can't or can't easily go into politics unless you were born into the political class. We may have social classes but we don't have a caste system and we do have a degree of social mobility.
Not just McSweeny. I think Starmer is autocratic having been a prosecutor he is far from a team man.
Agreed in a way. Lawyers are based on written case law and acts of parliament. So in general there is not a lot of debate. Whereas in normal business teams will have differing views and no principles to follow. So listening, building on other people’s ideas, and reaching a consensus is necessary.
Thanks for the explanation. I agree with almost everything you said in it except that in normal business there won't be principles to follow. Every business has some kind of organising conceptual framework. Some businesses make it explicit and talk about their values but that doesn't mean that the ones that don't overtly talk about values don't have them.
Prosecutors do not function as lone wolves or sole traders. They will have teams around them just like the defence. It seems they are not team players because we see them on their feet solo in court but that is t the whole job. If Starmer isn't a team player, that is down to his character rather than his professional formation.
To a degree. I worked in company with strong quaker values. Ou work was develp[ing software matahced to requirements for customers. There was a lot of discussion around design choices and options of different ways to do things. Sometimes passionate.
I'm not a Labour supporter but right now they are the best bet for the country. However their day to day management is questionable as Highlighted here. There have been so many false steps it suggests that McSweeney should go.
If Tories are no longer the party of power, I can’t help feeling that this is just a way to create a party that no longer represents the Left in a FPTP two party system which is fracturing anyway. It’s not just the “hard left” (a term I hate) they want to suppress now.
I suppose I started out being “soft left” as they would put it and look how that’s turning out? I saw Jess Phillips talk about how Labour MPs should act as a team (not rebelling) and I just thought, team work entails working together, listening to MPs who by the way represent the voters they made promises to. Not strong arming them into submission. This govt will continue to become unpopular. No question. If they keep going like this. I just don’t feel they represent me and I’ve been a Labour voter all my life.
There is a similarity with Boris Johnson in 2019. Keen to get his version of Brexit through he purged the Conservatives of dissent. New candidates had to be loyal to Johnson.
Starmer’s ongoing purges seem to be similar. Personal loyalty over principle.
Of course, if you are in a party you should expect to vote on the party line. Assuming the policy has wide agreement.
The British system, up until recently, has been large parties defined by broad principles. Policies thrashed out internally to deal with the needs of left and right.
Having narrower parties defined by a more limited set of boundaries means hollowing out the existing framework. It means more parties outside the big parties. Sniping from specific left or right perspectives.
It doesn’t mean that the left has wholly disappeared from Labour. It just means that the political space Keir Starmer seems to occupying is more to the centre right. More like the paternalistic instincts of the Conservatives pre-Thatcher.
It leaves an opening on the left and centre left. Whether parties in that space can devise an effective offer is up in the air.
Ending broad parties does mean the remainder are scrapping around for20-30% of the vote rather than the expectations that big parties attract north of 35% of the vote.
it's interesting comparing this to Patrick Maguire's version of the same events in the Times, which paints a very different and in my view entirely unconvincing picture.
Complete bollocks from people who have been raised on workers revolution and will settle for nothing else. Gaining office and discovering there are no quick fixes is a time honoured process for social democrats. Yes, join the clamour for an end to Starmer's leadership but only Reform will benefit.
You’d need a heart of stone not to laugh at a Labour Party that elected a man of no known principles and a cabinet captured by corporate interests and big money. Hence LINO, Labour in name only.
But Labour’s end of times and the Tory kamikazes is merely a symptom of a far greater malaise that encompasses the voting system, the power of The Party, a professional political class who owe nothing to the concept of public service.
We have a government elected by 33% of those who voted, which is 20% of those on the electoral register and when you take account of possibly 8million not properly registered means Labour’s landslide was supported by maybe 15% of all those eligible to vote. We have Hogg’s elective dictatorship supported by a tiny number of citizens.
I don’t call that democracy and it’s time journalists and others started questioning the legitimacy of a government that the vast majority didn’t vote for. And the tragedy for the UK is that there will be no change in this system of de facto dictatorship for the foreseeable future.
Hello Elizabeth, I didn’t mean “class” in that sense. I meant in the sense that these are people who have done very little outwith politics. They may do politics at university (the Oxbridge set do PPE), they become a researcher, a SPAD, a councillor and inch their way up the greasy pole till they get a seat in parliament. Mind you there are a few political “dynasties” even now - Benn, Miliband, Kinnock…
Now I understand, I agree with you. We need people with experience outside the Westminster bubble.
Why call them a class? It makes it sound as if you can't or can't easily go into politics unless you were born into the political class. We may have social classes but we don't have a caste system and we do have a degree of social mobility.