news & politics:discussion

[Neil]

we've got a law against dangerous dogs we also need one against dangerous dog whistles get braverman put down.

[Ommadawn]

4 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Again, it’s not the big crises you claimed it would be. A handful of frontbenchers have resigned and Starmer has kept the same stance as he did before. There will be no other action from this and on the front pages of tomorrows papers the majority lead with the Rwanda story. 

[Ozanne]

9 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Again, it’s not the big crises you claimed it would be. A handful of frontbenchers have resigned and Starmer has kept the same stance as he did before. There will be no other action from this and on the front pages of tomorrows papers the majority lead with the Rwanda story. 

 

[pink_triangle]

9 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Again, it’s not the big crises you claimed it would be. A handful of frontbenchers have resigned and Starmer has kept the same stance as he did before. There will be no other action from this and on the front pages of tomorrows papers the majority lead with the Rwanda story. 

The only way I could have seen this resonating would have been if someone like Rayner resigned. The fact it’s a load of unknown MPs will cause this story to disappear quickly in my view.

[Ozanne]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

The only way I could have seen this resonating would have been if someone like Rayner resigned. The fact it’s a load of unknown MPs will cause this story to disappear quickly in my view.

Yeah I agree, if it was someone like her or Streeting then it would be big news. But otherwise it will fade away given the other news of the day and I suspect Braverman will pop up again soon too. 

[pink_triangle]

3 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I don't think the story from this is the story.  It’s all about how much control Keir really has on the party.  His control looks a little paper thin. 

All the shadow cabinet members of note supported him. That’s pretty united for an issue that has divided labour over recent years. It’s not like Cruella resignation where she is standing there with a stick of dynamite to blow everything up. Even those who resigned seem to be pulling in the same direction.

[Neil]

40 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I don't think anyone called it a crises.  Its defo a problem...  and not a small one

Radio4 did a bit more about it, the story was starmer losing control of the party. Don't think there's much damage in it but reckon starmer could have done more to head it off, there's never a political  attack angle from stop killing each other  will be forgotten by next week 

[steviewevie]

Amazing the mental gymnastics people are doing over this. The 56 MPs voting against Labour whip and 8 shadow minsters who have quit/sacked is a big news story, just so happens the Rwanda ruling is a big news story too which a lot of tory papers are concentrating on, as is the endless carnage in Gaza. Jess Phillips is not a nobody either, she has been a Starmer loyalist up until now, as have many of them. Maybe over time it won't make much difference to the polling, we will see if it cuts through, people will see Labour rebellion in headlines and think oh same old Labour, just so happens that Tories are fighting amongst themselves too. Anyway, shows why Starmer needs a big majority if so many are willing to break the whip over such a "fringe" event.

Oh, and at moment it is still top story on BBC News website.

[steviewevie]

Anyway, at least US and China are besties now.

[Ozanne]

7 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

All the shadow cabinet members of note supported him. That’s pretty united for an issue that has divided labour over recent years. It’s not like Cruella resignation where she is standing there with a stick of dynamite to blow everything up. Even those who resigned seem to be pulling in the same direction.

It’s mainly the SCG that voted with the SNP anyway so it doesn’t really matter in the long run. Starmer has shown he’s not going to change course and if anything shows how tight a grip he’s got on the party.

It was said it would be a big problem for Labour just like we’ve heard again and again over this issues yet (just like I said) it hasn’t been. We be had a few SCG members quit the frontbench amicably, it’s hardly like the issues going on for the Tories. 

[squirrelarmy]

The only online complaints are coming from those who don’t like Starmer anyway. 
 

Does it change anything at all? Israel and Hamas are going to keep fighting each other regardless until one of them ceases to exist. What one countries opposition leader does 1000s of miles away isn’t going to change anything for the people in that region. 

[steviewevie]

7 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It’s mainly the SCG that voted with the SNP anyway so it doesn’t really matter in the long run. Starmer has shown he’s not going to change course and if anything shows how tight a grip he’s got on the party.

It was said it would be a big problem for Labour just like we’ve heard again and again over this issues yet (just like I said) it hasn’t been. We be had a few SCG members quit the frontbench amicably, it’s hardly like the issues going on for the Tories. 

Wow.

[steviewevie]

Those front benchers who quit were Starmer loyalists. Khan is not SCG. Corbynites can't stand Jess Phillips, she is actually in Labour friends of Israel. This was a big rebellion, if was happening on other side people would be all over it. Just saying it's nothing does not make it nothing.

Will it affect the outcome at next election? probably not. But it will be worrying Starmer's team.

[steviewevie]

Now they have to find MPs who didn't vote with SNP and are willing to fill those shadow minister vacancies. Bit messy.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

Amazing the mental gymnastics people are doing over this. The 56 MPs voting against Labour whip and 8 shadow minsters who have quit/sacked is a big news story, just so happens the Rwanda ruling is a big news story too which a lot of tory papers are concentrating on, as is the endless carnage in Gaza. Jess Phillips is not a nobody either, she has been a Starmer loyalist up until now, as have many of them. Maybe over time it won't make much difference to the polling, we will see if it cuts through, people will see Labour rebellion in headlines and think oh same old Labour, just so happens that Tories are fighting amongst themselves too. Anyway, shows why Starmer needs a big majority if so many are willing to break the whip over such a "fringe" event.

Oh, and at moment it is still top story on BBC News website.

Jess Phillips basically said she was resigning over the issue but pretty much fully behind everything else. That’s not going to be a huge problem. The big thing for Starmer among those people who resigned nobody is seriously after his job, in fact the bookies favourite to succeed him (Burnham) isn’t either an MP. This is very different to something like the May resignation over Brexit.

[Ozanne]

20 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Those front benchers who quit were Starmer loyalists. Khan is not SCG. Corbynites can't stand Jess Phillips, she is actually in Labour friends of Israel. This was a big rebellion, if was happening on other side people would be all over it. Just saying it's nothing does not make it nothing.

Will it affect the outcome at next election? probably not. But it will be worrying Starmer's team.

No one has said it’s nothing, we are just pointing out it’s not the big issues/problem/crises that you claimed it would be.

The vast majority of the frontbenchers that resigned were in the SCG so Starmer’s not really going to lose much sleep over them. Jess Phillips resigned amicably because of her constituency demographics, she’ll be back.

It’s really not this huge problem for Starmer, it doesn’t change anything for him. 

[pink_triangle]

21 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Those front benchers who quit were Starmer loyalists. Khan is not SCG. Corbynites can't stand Jess Phillips, she is actually in Labour friends of Israel. This was a big rebellion, if was happening on other side people would be all over it. Just saying it's nothing does not make it nothing.

Will it affect the outcome at next election? probably not. But it will be worrying Starmer's team.

To me it looked like there was a few different categories. Left wing MPs, Muslim MPs, or MPs who represented constituencies with significant muslim populations, so I agree to say they are all socialists is oversimplification. Your right Phillips is the high profile one, but that’s mainly for her media stuff as opposed to holding one of the big jobs, she can still be effective in that way from the backbenches.

[pink_triangle]

22 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Now they have to find MPs who didn't vote with SNP and are willing to fill those shadow minister vacancies. Bit messy.

It’s what they do every cabinet reshuffle, I’m sure they will fill easily. They have a few new MPs who could come in while others shuffle up. A lot of those who resigned will come back in the future anyway.

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

No one has said it’s nothing, we are just pointing out it’s not the big issues/problem/crises that you claimed it would be.

The vast majority of the frontbenchers that resigned were in the SCG so Starmer’s not really going to lose much sleep over them. Jess Phillips resigned amicably because of her constituency demographics, she’ll be back.

It’s really not this huge problem for Starmer, it doesn’t change anything for him. 

I guess subjective. I try and see things for how they actually are, not how I wish them to be.  I think this many MPs breaking whip to vote with another party, and this many front benchers willing to lose their job over this, does make it a big problem for Starmer. 

But I can't be arsed to keep arguing about it. 

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

It’s what they do every cabinet reshuffle, I’m sure they will fill easily. They have a few new MPs who could come in while others shuffle up. A lot of those who resigned will come back in the future anyway.

they can only pick from those who didn't vote for SNP amendment, and those who actually want to take the job brought about by such a contentious issue.

Edited November 16, 2023 by steviewevie

[Ozanne]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I guess subjective. I try and see things for how they actually are, not how I wish them to be.  I think this many MPs breaking whip to vote with another party, and this many front benchers willing to lose their job over this, does make it a big problem for Starmer. 

But I can't be arsed to keep arguing about it. 

You are trying to see it as this crises for Starmer when it isn’t as there won’t be anything else that happens as a result. There won’t be any challenge to his leadership or whole raft of MPs resigning. In fact the vast majority if not all haven’t even criticised the party last night. It really isn’t the issue you make it out to be for Labour.

I imagine they’ll fill those shad cab positions fairly easily. 

[steviewevie]

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

You are trying to see it as this crises for Starmer when it isn’t as there won’t be anything else that happens as a result. There won’t be any challenge to his leadership or whole raft of MPs resigning. In fact the vast majority if not all haven’t even criticised the party last night. It really isn’t the issue you make it out to be for Labour.

I imagine they’ll fill those shad cab positions fairly easily. 

ok yeah...Starmer's leadership isn't under threat, and polls won't likely be affected...and how damaging will likely depend on what happens in middle east...as soon as US calls for a ceasefire then so will UK govt and then so will Labour.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

they can only pick from those who didn't vote for SNP amendment, and those who actually want to take the job brought about by such a contentious issue.

They have loads of MPs who didn’t vote for that amendment. They will fill the spaces easily, they aren’t even high profile positions.

[steviewevie]

well known socialist firebrand Stella Creasy on the radio arguing why she voted for the ceasefire.