POLITICS CORNER

[Tripps]

More evidence of the PM's plight. From the 'Comments section' elsewhere. My view is that there's always the possibility that he remains a closet Marxist, and wishes the collapse of the nation, and it is all done by intention. Ably assisted by Mr Milliband and his hasty net zero nonsense.

It's hard to imagine there are still those who have stopped seeing what's in front of them, and would never not vote Labour.

Good piece by Allister Heath in the DT - I think Starmer will be long remembered as the PM that almost completely destroyed the UK.

"Time’s almost up for Keir Starmer. He is finished. He no longer has any real friends or allies, having sacrificed them all for the sake of prolonging his time in office by a few days. He has broken almost every promise he made, lied repeatedly and exposed himself as a hypocrite. He seems to care little about policy or detail or people, and has utterly failed to articulate, let alone impose, a vision for Britain. Few know what he stands for. He looks miserable and despondent, a grey man animated only by his unusual skill at internal Labour poliGood ticking. He is a living embodiment of what happens when extreme moral arrogance collides with the reality of being a Labour apparatchik in 2026.

He has destroyed the Labour Party for no noticeable benefit to anybody other than himself. He has ruined the economy. He has failed to reform the public sector and the NHS, or to reverse the housing construction crisis, which are supposedly areas where only Labour can act. His obsession with international and human rights law over Chagos and immigration has exposed Britain to global ridicule. He has accelerated the demise of our under-funded Armed Forces, while simultaneously intensifying the deranged lawfare campaign against them.

Elected on the grounds that he backed “working people”, he has further crippled “alarm clock Britain” for the benefit of growing legions of welfare-dependent adults who should be in work. He has betrayed every culturally conservative group in Britain, from private school parents to eurosceptics to farmers to the entirety of the petite bourgeoisie and aspirational working class. Far from applauding him, his erstwhile base among the far-Left, environmental extremists, the urban precariat, woke and anti-Western fanatics are, at best, bitterly disappointed and, at worst, furious with Starmer, a failed PM who must feel he can never catch a break.

He has backed Britain’s first wealth tax, but this disastrous policy has merely whetted Left-wing appetite for full-on socialism, if not proto-communism. He claimed that we would serve as a bridge with America, but his relationship with Trump has broken down. He pledged that he would respect Brexit, but has been rapidly reversing it (though not by enough to placate the Centrist Dads). He has turned against Israel, though not viciously enough for Green maniacs, and is sucking up to China. His time in office has been a complete, unmitigated disaster.

Inertia appears to be the only reason why Labour has, so far, only lost around half of an already emaciated 2024 electorate. It has further to fall. Technical problems relating to his successors – one of them isn’t an MP, another has yet to fix her tax problems – is a central reason why he is still in office; others include the incompetence, cowardice, short-term self-interest and generalised stupidity of his MPs, who are marching towards electoral oblivion.

Yet even the lemmings are finally getting it. The Mandelson scandal was the last straw. Something has changed in the putrid air of Westminster, and it’s not just the stench of panicky Labour MPs. One can smell plotters everywhere.

Starmer’s time in No 10 is coming to an end. Barring a miracle, he will go down as the shortest-tenured Labour PM in British history, failing even to catch up with Gordon Brown. It will be richly deserved, for rarely, if ever, has a man been this unsuited to the second highest office of State (after the King, that is).

None of Starmer’s last-ditch attempts at delaying the inevitable will succeed. He hopes the King’s visit to the US will boost his popularity. It won’t. He will seek to weaponise Britain’s dislike of Trump: he jumped on reports that the administration may be mulling backing Argentina’s claim over the Falklands. He will blame the war in Iran for the ongoing cost of living crisis, seeking to deflect from his own blunders, tax hikes and growth-killing measures. It won’t work either. He may seek to appease some on the Right of his party: he claimed on Friday that he would finally begin the process of banning the IRGC in the next Parliament. He hopes that the Home Secretary’s efforts on immigration will reduce small boat arrivals.

None of this will make any meaningful difference to his prospects. The council elections in England, and the elections in Wales and Scotland, will be a historic disaster for Labour. It will almost cease to be a national party. When the results come in, and the enormity of the catastrophe becomes apparent, Labour MPs will finally turn on Starmer. Will he uselessly seek to cling on? Will he bow to the inevitable? Will he negotiate a six-month exit? What is sure is that when he does depart, Starmer will fade into obscurity faster and more comprehensively than any previous Prime Minister. He will be neither missed, nor even remembered".




PS I heard a news bulletin on LBC where the first item was about Trump's two man delegation going to Islamabad to negotiate with the Iranians.

The last item in a three or four minute bulletin was a news flash that 'breaking news - they would not be going'.

Impossible to keep up. I shan't bother to try.

[Stanley]

That's a bleak assessment of Starmer David but I can't fault it. I share your disgust at Milliband's actions. (Which will have more and more damaging effects as the economic situation worsens...)
Your news flash about delegates is correct, I shall cover it in 'Seen in the news.'

Have a look at THIS assessment from Laura Kuenssberg.....
"We're living the dream," a minister jokes. Labour might have to rely on black humour over the next couple of weeks. Each day brings a vast set of elections closer - local tests in England, and national ballots in Wales and Scotland - votes that another cabinet minister frets "will be a disaster". We've been travelling around Wales this week, and Scotland last week, talking to the politicians vying for power, and the most important people of all - the public who'll make the choice on 7 May. Just when Labour needs to be going hammer and tongs in a campaign, instead, almost every day brings fresh embarrassment to the prime minister over his decision to give Lord Mandelson one of the finest jobs in the land - our man in Washington. Ructions in Whitehall. Rancour in Labour. A sense the government doesn't seem to have a grip. How big is the impact in Wales and Scotland of Sir Keir Starmer's woes? "It's just so huge," says a senior Labour MP who's been knocking on voters' doors in recent days. But these elections aren't remotely all about the government's recent horror show - we'll come to that in a second. Voters will decide who makes important devolved decisions affecting the lives of millions of people - the kind of schools kids go to; the standard of the care patients receive when they are sick; even income tax rates. Both the Labour administration in Cardiff and the SNP government in Edinburgh have been in charge for a remarkably long time - Labour since 1999, the SNP since 2007. It's perhaps not surprising, then, that voters we met in both countries expressed a similar level of disillusion with the status quo, frustration with a patchy track record on public services, and a sense devolution itself has not been all it was cracked up to be. The two countries are poised to make very different decisions on what's next
There is much more and I think i's worth taking note of.....

[Stanley]

See THIS report from Starmerland....
Sir Keir Stamer has insisted the "vast majority" of Labour MPs supported him and wanted him to continue doing his job as prime minister. He was speaking to the Sunday Times, external at the end of a week in which speculation about a potential leadership challenge has risen. Sir Keir told the paper "in politics, you get this sort of thing all of the time, there is always talk". Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the prime minister should resign over his decision to appoint Lord Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US, adding that Labour MPs should "develop a backbone and get rid of him" if he did not step down. Philp told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme that some ministers were "equivocating" over Sir Keir's future and that a couple of MPs were publicly calling on him to go. He said it was in "the national interest" for MPs to remove the prime minister.

[Stanley]

MORE Starmer woe....
Sir Keir Starmer is facing a vote by MPs on whether there should be a parliamentary investigation over his claims about the vetting of Lord Mandelson. Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle said he was allowing a debate on the matter on Tuesday and it would then be up to MPs to decide if the Privileges Committee should hold an inquiry. The prime minister has denied accusations he misled MPs over whether Lord Mandelson's vetting to be the UK's ambassador to the US followed "due process" and over his assertion that "no pressure whatsoever" was applied to officials at the Foreign Office. Sir Keir branded the move a "stunt" by the Conservatives and hinted he could order Labour MPs to vote against. Addressing a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party on Monday evening, Sir Keir also told his MPs: "Tomorrow is pure politics and we need to stand together against it." The BBC understands Labour MPs are likely to be whipped to vote down the Conservative motion to refer him to the Privileges Committee rather than being given a free vote. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said Sir Keir had misled Parliament "multiple times" on the subject. She urged Labour MPs to "look into their consciences" and back an inquiry by the Privileges Committee. A Downing Street spokesperson said the claims from the Conservatives "have no substance" and the government is "engaging with the two parliamentary processes that are already running" on Lord Mandelson's appointment "with full transparency". These include: the requirement to publish documents related to Lord Mandelson's appointment through a procedure known as a humble address; and the Foreign Affairs Committee holding evidence sessions to assess the vetting process.

[Whyperion]

I cannot agree with the DT that allowing in work / working age benefits to increase and also increasing taxation (a bit) is any reason for low(er) economic growth. Benefits - to those that need them - are not easy to claim and are barely enough to cover basic living needs ( that being in work also results in much the same perhaps says a lot about the economics of brexit and a long term failed tory governance ). Cutting the size of the state, in itself creates no immediate improvement ( see US and is appaling health care system ). But daily real jobs are going seeming at a faster rate than under Thatcher, often due to a lack of demand for products (over priced) Employers NHI costs ( yes maybe money has to come from somewhere but its not the correct place - it should have been , despite being politically wrong , some small higher levels of income tax ), and an over priced and totally wrong energy market. There has not been enough nationalisation - the opportunity was squandered under Darling/Brown and not acted on now. Water, Electricty and Gas should be under the control of Govt (rail is and there is no really improvement as the treasury still has wrong rules and misses investment for public good all wrong but that is for another day).

King Charles (speech modified re gun attack on Trump) speech we should note due today , is a Speech to Congress in the light of 250 years of Independence of the American Colonies, and not necessarily a reposte to Trump as a President in itself.

[Stanley]

See THIS report on Starmer and Parliament yesterday.....
2 hours ago
There can be moments of high jeopardy in Parliament when Westminster holds its breath to await the outcome of a crucial debate that could determine a government's future. In the end this didn't feel like one of them, but that doesn't mean Sir Keir Starmer has escaped unscathed. Ultimately he won the vote pretty comfortably with a clear majority of MPs rejecting the idea that he should be referred to a parliamentary committee for investigation over his statements about Lord Mandelson's appointment as US ambassador. But beyond the headline win, this was not a victorious moment.

[Stanley]

See THIS report about Farage and funding.....
Nigel Farage received £5m from Reform UK mega donor Christopher Harborne before he became an MP, it has emerged. In an interview with The Telegraph, external, the Reform UK leader said he had been given the money to pay for personal protection "so that I would be safe and secure for the rest of my life". He also told the newspaper his home had been targeted last year in a firebomb attack. Labour and the Conservatives have both accused Farage of breaking Commons rules by not declaring the £5m gift in the register of interests, with the Tories saying they had referred the Reform leader to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. Harborne, a British cryptocurrency investor who lives in Thailand, last year donated £9m to Reform UK - the biggest single donation to a UK political party by a living person. In total, the businessman gave £12m to Reform in 2025 and has donated to the Conservatives in the past. The separate £5m gift to Farage, also reported by The Guardian, external, came in early 2024, Reform sources told the BBC, and it does not appear on his MP register of interests. Labour Party chair Anna Turley said Farage "appears to have broken the rules again by failing to declare this cash from his billionaire backer". Conservative party chair Kevin Hollinrake said that as a new MP, he should have declared the gift, adding: "Why does Reform think the rules don't apply to them? "This stinks and Reform should come clean now."
Nice work if you can get it.....

[Stanley]

See THIS BBC report for another thing to worry about.....
Published
1 hour ago
Britain must not keep changing prime ministers, Sir John Major has warned in a broadside at those who treat politics as a "game show" while leaving big problems to the next generation. The former Conservative prime minister accused today's focus-group obsessed politicians of thinking their job was to "provide fodder for the media and project your own career" while delaying action on complex issues like healthcare, pensions and climate change. In an interview for BBC Radio 5 Live and Newsnight, he said: "The best aphrodisiac in politics is hope. If people can see a change, there's a change in atmosphere." He said he felt "very strongly" that the reluctance to make difficult arguments on big issues "demeans politics". Without a new generation of young people who value public service being willing to enter politics, "we are in deep doodah", he added. Sir John was Conservative prime minister from 1990-97, winning the 1992 election with the most votes ever recorded for a British political party. Three years later he faced down internal party division, challenging his rivals to "put up or shut up" He defeated Tory MP John Redwood in a ballot of his MPs. Some have suggested Sir Keir Starmer, rumoured to be under pressure from rivals like Angela Rayner and Wes Streeting, might do the same. Sir John said: "The fate of individual politicians doesn't really matter as much as the development of the right policy. "I mean, it isn't a good idea to keep changing prime ministers. I think it is an idea to have a limited number of years. I think the Americans who have two terms of a president and then stop. I think that is sensible."
Is it just me or is John Major talking a lot of sense now he is retired..... ?

[Stanley]

See THIS report on Polanski's apology....
Zack Polanski has apologised for sharing a social media post condemning the actions of police officers who arrested the suspect in the Golders Green attack. The Green Party leader had reposted a message on X accusing officers of "repeatedly and violently kicking a mentally ill man in the head when he was already incapacitated by Taser". In a statement on Friday, Polanski apologised for "sharing a tweet in haste", adding that he should not have commented on the police response via social media. Sir Keir Starmer branded the decision to share the post "disgraceful", in a BBC interview recorded before Polanski's apology. Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme in an interview to be broadcast on Saturday, Sir Keir said he had met the officers involved in the arrest. He added that in the circumstances, you could understand why the officers acted in the way that they did. "There's a guy on the ground, he's got a rucksack on. And I don't know what was going through the mind of those officers, but if I was there, I'd be thinking, he's going to detonate something. He's going to blow me up and everybody around here," the prime minister added. "In those circumstances, I think you can quite see why what could have gone through their mind is, we need to do whatever we can to disable this guy." Polanski hit back at the PM's criticisms in a post on X, saying: "Today the prime minister uses his office to attack the only Jewish party leader to score political points."
Can you remember the days before the advent of social media when there was no way of venting hastily formed opinions?

[Stanley]

HERE'S Laura Kuenssberg's view on next week's elections.....
Brace yourselves. I promise this will not be a piece about whether or not the election results will give the Prime Minister his metaphorical P45. Not a huge amount has changed since I wrote about the level of doom last month. Unless you've been living on another planet, you'll have heard or read plenty of talk, and it's serious, about whether or not Labour MPs are going to move against the prime minister. It's grave enough for Starmer's allies to be getting their lines out early - striking a defiant tone, telling me this morning he'll "accept no deals, no pacts, no timetables, and will get on with being PM". "Keir is on the international stage focusing on ensuring that Trump doesn't wipe out the hard-fought progress the government has made on the cost of living crisis," they told me. "He isn't going to spend months talking to the membership when the country needs him to lead it." The message is clear to his MPs and restless ministers - try if you like, but I'll fight you to stay.
There is much more and I think it's worth reading.....

[Stanley]

See THIS report by Chris Mason....
In a time of volatility, at home and abroad, why on earth would you want that in your politics as well? This was the essence of the Prime Minister's message in his BBC interview today. Sir Keir Starmer has his back against the wall. He has had to deal with a spring of conflict, at home and abroad: America and Israel's war against Iran, which began at the end of February and the attack on two Jewish men in Golders Green in north London, on Wednesday. Both are, of course, laden with consequences – for diplomacy, the military, the economy and society. Starmer has been wrestling with all of this against the backdrop of the never ending Lord Mandelson saga and incessant chatter about his own future. Just today, the Daily Telegraph is reporting on the health secretary Wes Streeting's manoeuvres , and The Guardian is reporting on the Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham's. In his interview with the Today Programme, the Prime Minister responded to events of the last few days and months, but also had another crack at setting out what he is all about. "I want to live in a Britain that I love, which is a decent, tolerant, live and let live, diverse Britain. But that is contested now in a way that it hasn't been contested in my lifetime," he told Radio 4. It is an argument he has made before, including in his party conference speech last autumn, but he was doing it here in the context of the attacks in Golders Green and in the context of his political predicament. He was explicit in his criticism of Zack Polanski and the Green Party of England and Wales and implicit in his criticism of Reform UK. Implicit too was the way he is addressing these profound challenges while some in his own party are sizing up trying to replace him
A lot hangs on what happens on Thursday.....

[Whyperion]

Can you remember the days before the advent of social media when there was no way of venting hastily formed opinions?

Letter to the Daily Telegraph (or local evening newspaper of your choice)

hard-fought progress the government has made on the cost of living crisis,
to me the Govt has done very little , a small payment on free school meals for u11s , and an increase in minimum wage , just throwing money at giving extra funds to pay for extra costs is not the same as reducing costs at the ground level (like reducing VAT on domestic energy - which should have been done by the tories years ago anyway).
Labour might be all talk rather than an effort walk and they will probably lose the shire west midlands but seem entrenched in parts of London but the areas of London with high Islam populations (Ilford and Tower Hamlets) the story will be different with Havering and Barking probably seeing increase in Reform vote that I dont see happening in much of the west of london - even the tories I think will get good results in Hillingdon

[Stanley]

See THIS assessment by Chris Mason.... I think elections are imminent!
There are now just days left before a vital set of elections around Britain on Thursday, which will determine who spends billions of pounds of taxpayers' money and will shape the mood and career prospects of political leaders in town halls, in Holyrood, in the Senedd and in Westminster. Depending on where you are reading this, your doormat may have been carpeted with colourful leaflets for weeks and your TV and social media feeds chocca with political promises. You may already have voted - postal votes have been arriving with people and been posted back for some time now. Or perhaps you are in Northern Ireland or the parts of England without elections this year and this is all stuff happening elsewhere. Wherever you are, these elections matter and tell us something about the British political tussle of the mid-2020s. In recent years, the palette of popular political parties has widened. For decades, Labour and the Conservatives were the primary colours of British politics. Not the only parties, for sure, but - most of the time at least - standing tall compared with their Westminster rivals. Now, almost wherever you look, politics feels like it is changing. As well as Labour and the Conservatives, in the English local contests there are the Liberal Democrats, there is Reform UK, there is the Green Party of England and Wales and there are often competitive independents too. In the devolved elections, in Wales there is Plaid Cymru, which would one day like to see an independent Wales, and in Scotland, there are the Scottish Green Party and the Scottish National Party, both of whom would like to see Scotland become independent. Most of these parties have been around for a long time, Reform UK less so. But what has changed is they all appear more competitive in more places than they used to be. And this has coincided with Labour and the Conservatives both being unpopular at the same time, which is rare. This fracturing was clear at the last general election two years ago, even if the make-up of the House of Commons afterwards didn't really reflect it. Labour won a huge majority of seats, but did so with the smallest ever vote share for a government with an overall majority in the House of Commons. And it was simultaneously the first time since 1832 that the Conservatives had won less than 30% at a general election.

[Stanley]

See THIS report by Chris Mason on tomorrow's polls....
30 minutes ago
We stand on the cusp of the biggest set of elections since the general election two years ago. Tomorrow morning, polling stations will be open in communities across Scotland and Wales, as voters choose who should run their devolved governments - and they will be open too in many, but not all, parts of England, as more than 5,000 seats on 136 councils are contested, as well as six mayoral vacancies. For weeks already, people having been casting their ballot by post. The parties and the candidates are now preparing their final pitch to you. Plaid Cymru, who one day would like to see an independent Wales, are in a tussle with Reform UK to emerge as the largest party in the newly expanded Senedd, the Welsh Parliament. Plaid argue they are the only party that can beat Reform, and so hope to attract voters who might not normally be drawn to them, but are very keen Reform are not the winners. Reform, for their part, are confident they can emerge as the biggest party in the Senedd. In Scotland, the Scottish National Party are confident of winning their fifth devolved election in a row. Like Plaid, they too are pitching themselves as the most viable option when it comes to beating Nigel Farage's party. Reform are revelling in being competitive in a nation that strongly endorsed Remain in the Brexit referendum a decade ago. And it is not just in Scotland and Wales that Westminster's two big beasts, Labour and the Conservatives, are on the back foot.
I'm not too sure about that statement about Reform and Brexit....... Friday is going to be interesting!

[Stanley]

THIS is the main item of political comment today.....
Published
1 hour ago
Millions of people across England, Scotland and Wales are set to vote in the largest set of polls since the general election in 2024. Voters in Scotland and Wales will choose who should run their national parliaments, while seats on dozens of councils and mayors are up for election in England. The polls will be open between 07:00 BST and 22:00 BST on Thursday 7 May, with results expected to follow on Friday and over the weekend. The polls will be the biggest test of public opinion since Labour won the general election in 2024. These will be the second set of elections during the premiership of Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In Scotland, where the Scottish National Party is currently in power, the election will decide who governs the country in key areas such as health and education. All 129 Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) are up for re-election. In Wales, where Labour has continuously been in power since devolution in 1999, 92 seats are up for grabs in an expanded Senedd. The party that wins the most seats in the Senedd would expect to lead the Welsh government and, like in Scotland, set policy on devolved issues. There are about 5,000 councillors across 136 local authorities, as well as six mayors, up for election in parts of England. Labour either controls or leads the majority of the council areas where voters are going to the polls in England on Thursday.
The results will be instructive and could shape progress for many years to come. They are that important.

[Stanley]

No point in going on about the elections because there are not enough results yet but the essence of what is available so far is that Labour are losing seats to Reform. The other parties are marking time so far.....

[Whyperion]

Indeed while too few England seats to call completely we can make some observations
1) Slack BBC reporting in verbal sense on BBC TV , with misleading at least one Lab person when reading Lab 10 Ref 3 Con 1 then saying Lab lost control ( totals with extant implied Lab lead ) because she didnt add Indy 1 Grn 1 . Green indeed ignored by much of the commentators but they actually had more impact - other than gaining significant seats.
Overall - Turnout was about 10percent up on last year ( ie from about just under 41 percent to just over 45 percent in most wards fought )
Certain Labour Controlled areas generally Con vote went to Reform , Lab Vote minority moved to Green this tipping Reform into gaining the seat. Little show of Reform gaining Lab votes but accross the country the vote increase went greater to Reform. Lib Dems generally held station gaining Stockport basically on technicalities of vote shares rather than a big swell. Labour did better in thameside essex than one would expect.
Elsewhere Grn nibbled Lab and Lib but LibDem got Richmond 100percent gaining from Grn ( this might be a Gaza.Israel backlash in that area )
Bolton Grn very responsible for Lab falling away ( not necessarily due to Gaza etc stance- this might have been longer standing green issues ).
Zone 1-4 London somewhat odd. Tory Gain from Lab (again Green taking Labour votes but Westminster could be Oxford Street vs Mayor Khan) but Lab vote up in some places taking odd Tory Seats - once more Reform though low other than "working class" (??pensioner?) white wards enough to take some Con areas down enough for Lib Dem or Labour to slip in getting twos or threes. Greens generally getting about a 500 vote turnout from 3-5000 voters which must indicate something. Noting more London seats counting today , indeed the overnight thrill of counting is missing a lot - it does save money - and Lib Dem candidate in Merton fell ill at count having been up since 4am Thursday.
There are a few councils now NOC with some interesting coalition permutations and a couple with effective dead heats and if unable to choose a leader (29/29) no casting vote available either , I think casting vote in a tie is by drawing lots ? (or persuading someone to cross a party whip ?)

[Whyperion]

A week in Politics may be a long time but next week sees the Kings Speech and a new session of Parliament, but a General Election is still ages away and a war in the Gulf rumbles away , I think US elections arrive first though and perhaps a change in the US or prospect of one will free up and liberate the UK bringing a little relief.
So what can the parties look forward to ? Conservatives, the only way is up but what is their design philosophy. Reform / Farage difficult with 31 to 39percent fairly entrenched support that cannot be dislodge with normal political campainging , throwing shit (however true) wont stick to the man with constant clean suit , but a self imposed ban on accepting tory representatives into the party might restrict its future growth. Labour cannot move to Reform ground , withouth losing the other side to Green or Lib Dem (at least enough to lose votes and thus lose to Reform on the numbers). No matter how much funding Labour can channel into the Streets of Halton or Hartlepool I cannot see a way to buy influence ( the retaining of winter fuel allowance might have stopped the slippage but that went day one of chancellors messaging ). Can there be a way to increase people in education , or work, other than defence industries I cannot see much change in the next 24 months as the Employers NHI increases has led to less high street activity and inflationary costs (something that increasing taxation on workers would not have happened in the same way - tax could have gone up , but interest rates then down , increasing economic activity and balancing the tax loss of what net pay could by (Assuming no house price inflation). no party really notices that , Conservatives cannot criticise Labour as it their policies generally being followed, Reform can claim great impact with offering nothing , Libs Offer but remain unheard , Greens hold a moral ground wrt Israel expansion but this brings a little too much sectarian split on politics. So making plans for Nigel, or is Nigel making plans ?

[PanBiker]

The Labour Party could try a bit of socialism. Fat chance with the media hype that would follow. Mind you it would need a Socialist PM to sell it properly.

[Whyperion]

Such I feel in Barnsley is turkeys voting for Christmas. Labour apparently have been delivering in the town- a new health centre for example , but no the folk want the change that Reform will bring , I dont think they read the small. or large, Reform manifesto such as it is.

Media making a lot of Reform winning London (well Havering) , Greens getting Lewisham mayor not causing a flutter in the press - if you want socialism try following what Greens might just do in Lewisham.
Perhaps someone can explain why Starmer finds socialism so distasteful as a policy given his stated reasons for going into politics (and choosing Labour) Reeves and Starmer would both , in terms of actions ,find a better fit in tories- though worker policies might be a difficult sell there.

BBC National predictions for a parliamentary election give a right wing wedge of 43percent adding reform+tory. That is a difficult wedge for LibDem Green or Labour to make any kind of inroads into ,rather depends how permanent the reform holding of votes in the "working" areas of Salford, Barnsley , Sunderland , Essex , Valley Wales and similar are come two years time ( when thoughts of Govt election come to mind - it can be as late as Aug 2029 but I imagine early May might be better for Labour to catch the student vote but October 2028 after the party conferences/autumn statement might be worth a think about. There is about one more round of local elections for a small third of seats/councils in some places still to come before then.
Where Reform have a min max number of seats local places , will other parties freeze them out ?

[Whyperion]

The Labour Party could try a bit of socialism. Fat chance with the media hype that would follow. Mind you it would need a Socialist PM to sell it properly.

more democratic in its candidate selection ?- how did Starmers niece get on in Croydon ? Big what if regarding If Burnham had stood in Gorton (and won)
11 councils yet to declare (some had been counting mayors hence running late for councils)
Bradford
Calderdale
Croydon
Lambeth
Haringey
Kirklees
Lewisham
Newham
Redbridge
West Surrey
Tower Hamlets

For Wales and Scotland and the Green Vote in England to me are votes for what ( separtism aside ) Labour values are. I suppose for some kind of social care Pensions came in under Liberals ( with Welsh/Methodist roots ). Labour really has NEVER been totally "popular" in Westminster terms and its control of "Northern" councils in the past tainted with corruption and inefficiency and an amount of self-serving. only really the immediate post WW2 nationalisation and NHS establishment ( nationalising a lot of penny self help hospitals effectively ) created an opportunity squandered by the time Churchill was returned again. Gordon Brown's unwillingness to work with LibDems wrote the final death to me of Labour (present admin walking disaster proves that) and a death of the UK economy too.

[Stanley]

"The Labour Party could try a bit of socialism."
Spot on Ian, but have they forgotten how to do that?
HERE'S the latest update....
Updated 54 minutes ago
Sir Keir Starmer has insisted he will not quit as prime minister and "plunge the country into chaos", as Labour reels from significant election losses. The results in England, Scotland and Wales have piled pressure on Sir Keir, with some Labour MPs calling for him to set a timetable for his departure, although his cabinet allies have backed him for now. Labour has lost power in Wales, ending its 27 year-long rule, while the SNP appears likely to remain the largest party in Scotland. Reform UK has been the big winner in England, picking up more than 1,400 seats and taking control of councils in areas where Labour and the Conservatives have been historically dominant.Surveying the scale of Labour's disastrous elections performance, the number of Labour MPs saying publicly that Sir Keir Starmer should resign or attach a sell-by date to his premiership had passed 20 by late Friday evening. There are no shortage of Labour MPs who say it is the prime minister himself who was toxic to many voters. "There was one issue on the door and it was Keir. If he leads us into a future election we are dead," one Labour MP told the BBC. Another usually loyal Labour MP, in an area that went heavily Reform in Thursday's poll, told us that the reassuring thing was that voters didn't really hate Labour, but "they did hate Keir". A senior Labour figure said to me "everyone in Wales is saying this is all Starmer's fault". But others do fret about the downsides of a leadership race while the party is in government, and also wonder if it would actually make any difference. "I am still of the view that anyone who takes over will inherit the same problem - an impatient and almost ungovernable country that wants tax cuts and spending increases on nearly everything," said another Labour MP.
One is allowed to be wise before the event and Ian and I saw this coming. Starmer's attempt to do a Blair and move the Party to the right is the real problem. As Ian says, if they are looking at a recovery plan they could always try embracing socialism....

[PanBiker]

Regardless of what Starmer says, it wont be up to him if he stays. They shouldn't worry about a leadership chang, they have along way to go to catch up with the death throws of the Tories. Tory Leader Kemmy is spouting as if they have a chance of forming the next government. One of the commentators hit the nail on the head there saying that they haven't spent enough time in the wilderness yet for the ravages of the previous 14 years, he reckoned at least a 15 year penance was required. Events will probably overtake both main parties sooner rather than later. I think there is more of a case now for a change in voting regime, more cooperation is required in preference to the two sword lengths nonsense that we have now.

[Stanley]

That's all true Ian but what came into my mind this morning as I listened to the pundits giving their opinions on Week in Westminster was what Jeremy Corbyn did when he won the leadership of the Party... Or rather what he didn't do. He didn't purge his opponents from the Shadow Cabinet. He left them there and it was an invitation to Starmer to pursue his aim to resurrect Blairite policies. He should have followed Macmillan's example and had a 'night of the long knives. So many of the elements that have ripped Labour apart can be traced out to there.
There is another element which I mentioned at the time.... Starmer is a lousy orator and his voice immediately sounds like a family solicitor. This matters and personally I only have to hear a fraction of his whining, nasal delivery to be completely repelled.
There will be movement soon....

[Whyperion]

Sat AM and Starmer brings back Gordon Brown and Yvette Cooper ( she as some kind of thing for women -beyond my pay grade, If labour had cared about women then at least some kind of token WASPI compensation (5grand per person ?) could have been considered.
Sat PM and hard wispers of a possible challenge to Starmer supposedly there is enough to back a motion to call election.
Green pick up another council and are 2nd or 3rd in hung ones - will Lib Dems work with Green against a Lab higher number of seats - should total popular vote share be a guide for them ?