Analysis Guest article

Guest article: Starmer is less secure since conference and must be removed as soon as possible

Phil Bevin worked in Jeremy Corbyn ‘LOTO’ office. Here, he gives his assessment of Keir Starmer’s conference, media misrepresentation and concludes that Starmer is more vulnerable than ever – and must be removed urgently.

“Starmer’s conference was a triumph. He crushed his enemies with rule changes that ensure Labour’s left wing can never regain the leadership, and the resignation of socialist front bencher Andy McDonald sent a clear message to the public that Labour is “back in business” and on course to beat the Conservatives at the next election; as a result, Starmer’s authority within the Party his stronger than ever and he has nothing to fear. This is why his team now feels confident enough to brief against Ed Miliband, probably the highest performing, highest profile member remaining in his shadow cabinet. Starmer has cemented Labour’s shift to the hard right and there’s no way back.”

At least that’s the impression you might get if your sole source of information is the mainstream media. But a closer look reveals an uncomfortable truth for the present Labour leader. Contrary to the ‘MSM’ consensus, Starmer is actually less secure after conference 2021 than he was going into it.

Why? Well, there was a reason Starmer wanted to pass the electoral college reforms for leadership elections and to raise the threshold for parliamentary nominations for potential leaders above 20%. Had he been successful in reintroducing the electoral college system, which would have given the right wing PLP considerably more weight in the voting process and forced members to have their say only via easy-to-rig CLP nominations, any challenge to his leadership from the left would have been utterly pointless.

But he failed, resulting in a high-profile, embarrassing climbdown. Moreover, in the main, the changes only apply to leadership elections where there is a vacancy, such as in the very likely scenario of Starmer having to stand down when Labour loses the next election. In the circumstances of a challenge to Starmer while he’s in post, the rules of the game have barely changed. Before conference, the nomination threshold for a potential challenger was 20% of the PLP and this is the same now. Yes, registered supporters are gone, but these were not decisive in electing Corbyn anyway.

This is actually worse for Starmer than had the PLP nomination threshold in circumstances of a leadership vacancy remained at 10%. Canvassing MPs over their willingness to back a challenge to an incumbent leader is a risky business. For those who haven’t previously been brave enough to speak openly against the leadership, there at least remained the possibility of keeping quiet until after the next election, when, while the 10% nominations threshold was in place, it would have been relatively easy for a left-wing candidate to get on the ballot. Why burn bridges and take risks now, when you have a better chance of getting what you want later on?

Now, with the threshold raised to 20%, there is no incentive to wait. The likelihood of getting a left-wing candidate on the leadership ballot is the same while Starmer is leader as it is in the event that he steps down. Furthermore, the longer left-wing MPs wait, the less likely it is that their candidate will be successful in a ballot of members, ever more of whom are being purged by the leadership.

This would be less an issue for Starmer if his reputation among many who voted for him in 2020 had not been terminally undermined by the following during conference:

Worse still for Starmer, the lie has also been given to claims that the rightwards drift of the Labour Party is popular with the general public by the fact that this year’s conference has not resulted in an identifiable polling “bounce”: Labour remains behind the Tories during a period of prolonged national crisis. Most worryingly for Labour, actual by-election results are consistently far worse than national polling indicates. Things look set to get a lot worse for the party very soon.

Had Starmer been open about his Blairite intentions during the 2020 leadership election, he’d never have won among members. However, it’s also worth remembering that one reason for lowering the PLP nomination threshold in 2015, was to ensure that an avowedly Blairite candidate could make it to the members’ ballot. In other words, the amount of parliamentary support for the hard-right turn of Starmer’s leadership should not be overestimated, especially as it looks set to lose many MPs their seats and there’s now no incentive to wait until after the next election before he is challenged.

Starmer’s actions as leader so far – the sackings, the gerrymandering, the expulsions and rule changes – are indicative of a leadership besieged by its own fear and a sense of paranoia, which is perpetuating a permanent state of crisis, not confidence. Perhaps this is because Starmer knows, and has always known, that he is unable to win an honest argument with his internal opponents and is incapable of putting forward a policy platform that will be popular with the public. Whatever the reasons for his actions as leader, it seems far more likely that the emerging attacks on Ed Miliband are a sign of insecurity, not strength.      

Keir Starmer is a political minnow; he’s a tiny fish in a very small pond and likely feels it all too keenly. Worse, under his direction, the Labour pond is shrinking to a puddle and he seems to feel that there isn’t enough room within it to accommodate any bigger fish who might squeeze him out.

The longer Starmer stays, the more talented people will be side-lined or purged, and the smaller Labour will get, until it’s support dries up completely and it is no longer a viable electoral force. Conference 2021 has revealed Starmer’s weakness. The challenge for what remains of Labour’s left and now even centre-left is to not be weaker still. As his decision to write an editorial for the S*n shows, the present leader is so desperate for the establishment’s blessing that he’s willing to destroy Labour’s electoral base to get it. Starmer must go now if the Labour party itself is to survive.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to without hardship, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


    1. Is the ‘right’ confident they won’t? That would be dangerously complacent in light of the growing pressure on Starmer who mislead the Party when campaigning for the leadership and blatantly LIED about his opinions and policies.

      1. “Have ‘the left’ managed to find a credible leadership candidate yet?”
        It is refreshing to see such a novel and imaginative comment. Shame that you waited until now to impart such pearls of wisdom, which will be valued, I am sure, by all who visit this site.

    2. As sycophant-in-chief, do you never, ever, get disheartened with the number of times Starmer has slapped you around the face with a wet-kipper?

      He constantly lets you down, and, yet, there you are, coming back for more. Like a whipped dog.

      That’s above and beyond cringe worthy.

      Have some pride, man.

      1. “That’s above and beyond cringe worthy.” Above and beyond the Call of Duty.

        Maybe he’s psychotic too. (It’s the kinder conslusion – if not, he’s just offensively right wing and shouldn’t be in the Labour party either).

    3. Have you told anyone of a difference between stammerism and conservatism yet, wee stevie goebbels?

      Still insisting keef has kept to his pledges?

      No suprise to see you’ve popped out of the bunker for a single comment in order to defend your Fuhrer.

      Best get back down there, Magda’s got some kool-aid waiting.

      1. Toffee wee fella is extremely busy with bot sentinel @carterend spreading the propoganda.I have a feeling that tough words with “forensic” knowledge of his propoganda have chased him off…for now?.

    4. If neoliberal posters think the left is irrelevant why do they pollute debate on sites like this, with their propaganda?
      And this goes back to the oldest of complaints about neoliberal entryism, which is, if your political case is so strong why haven’t you founded your own political party instead of trying to steal other people’s historical grassroots activism?

      1. Bernie – What propaganda?
        I just asked if ‘the left’ had found a credible candidate yet, it isn’t my fault that the answer is no.

      2. Doug – Come back and tell me all about it when ‘the left’ have found a credible candidate.

      3. Neoliberals coming onto this site to argue the left has no candidate knowing full well the rules have been gerrymandered to prevent a left candidate are disingenuous and arguing in bad faith.
        Simply hardly worth responding to, and certainly not worth dignifying by naming the specific posters.

      4. Bernie – ….and yet here you are telling us all about it 🙄

    5. There’s a point here. Starmer position is weak as the opposition is strong. His supporters can be seen unconfident (too many heads on the wall etc.), but as long as there’s no confident opposition his position is safe.

      1. ‘Confident opposition’ (to Starmer within Labour). Frightening stuff, we might start behaving like a political party aspiring for the good again. Good point Ron.

    6. Well it’s obvious to a blind man on a galloping horse that in Starmer the extreme center have not found a credible leader.

      1. Hardly surprising when a majority within the movement to the left of Ayan Rand have been purged out of any position right down to local Branch level, not to mention membership, via the gerrymandering of process and procedures by malevolent sectarians on behalf of the one per cent.

        Cheered on, of course, by their usual suspect cap doffing and forelock tugging Uriah Heep’s who are no different to the WATP types who parasitically infect the Scottish and N. Ireland body politic.

        Any half wit can sit on the sidelines applauding and championing the systematic elimination of any opposition and then disingenuously and dishonestly blame those subject to such practices for an absence of a challenger.

        Keep wrapping that metaphorical rope round your neck Steve, there’s plenty left.

      2. Dave – You’ve got 36(?) to choose from, where’s the problem?

      3. Dave – OR is the real problem that not one of them is up-to the task?

      4. Tell us SteveH, which part of gerrymandering the system and the organisational structure, processes, procedures and personnel at every level, along with purging the voting membership to achieve desired outcomes now and in the future are you dishonestly pretending you don’t understand?

      1. qwertboi – Have you actually looked at all the rule changes? Some are quite significant.

    7. SteveH
      It’s incredible you think Temporary Embarrassment is credible

      We are at the stage where anyone who cares about the Labour Party has to accept this is a campaign to burn it to the ground
      My observation from this article which is very good, is that the internal report told us everything we needed to know about Red Tories
      And yet there are socialist MP’s still looking for an olive branch, same people who called Brexit and the AS Scam wrong
      For the love of God hold your hands up and beg for forgiveness, then get on with the day job and tell them they are in the wrong party and off they must fuck

      1. Doug – If that was the case then it is even more incredible that you can’t find a credible candidate to challenge him.

      2. Doug, Can you give an example or two of socialist MPs ‘still looking for an olive branch’. Thanks

      3. Alan Howard
        All those who refuse to mount a challenge against Temporary Embarrassment

      4. Doug, little Stevie is once again being deliberately disingenuous. He know very well that the purge of members who do not subscribe to the failed, unworkable and anti- democratic dogma of the extreme centerist’s and their narrative makes any challenge impractical.

        Even if a majority occurred after having purged so many of the voting membership it would not be allowed to see the light of day. The Conference fixes on the Evens GS confirmation ballot along with the consistent rejection by various Conference Chairs of votes on issues they did not want to lose are sufficient on their own to verify this reality.

      5. Right, so socialist MPs still looking for an olive branch are those who refuse to mount a leadership challenge, despite the fact that they don’t have the numbers to do so. You never-ever tire of ways of trying to discredit left-wing MPs, do you Doug, even though your ‘discrediting’ is based on a falsehood.

        So perhaps you could name them Doug – ie these socialist MPs who are still looking for an olive branch AND called Brexit and the A/S scam wrong. Cheers

  1. I agree with the author, Phil Bevin.

    Under Starmer’s disastrous, leadership, Labour’s base is shrinking and will continue to shrink.

    There’s no enthusiasm for him, his lack of policies or his lack of principles.

    The best thing Socialists can do is to ignore him, and start organising themselves. There is an embarrassment of riches in the younger people, within the movement. They have energy and ideas to spare.

    It will take time, but a combination of old heads and young feet, is, in my opinion, the best way forward for Socialism.

  2. Needless to say, just about everyone on the left agrees with Phil Bevin that Starmer needs removing, and the sooner the better. But given that the SCG haven’t got the numbers to make a leadership challenge, it would have been helpful if Phil could have explained how it could be done. But even if the left COULD find the numbers to nominate someone to challenge him, the problem is that around 120,000 left-wingers and counting have left the party, and no doubt the right-dominated NEC would implement a cut-off date so as to disqualify all those who joined after that date – ie the left-wingers who rejoined to vote for the left challenger.

    1. Allan Howard I can see the point you are making but I believe that the right wing movers and shakers have become increasingly concerned about the activities of the Labour party leader and his henchman.Maybe mr Bevin as more contacts inside the Labour party than we do.and knows that distant rumblings especially looking at the pols after conference just might turn into a avalanche.

      1. Jesus! Have we come to the point where people boasting about participating in colonialism and militarism can post here and are treated as credible parts of the Labour movement?
        You’d have been hard pushed to express these sentiments in the 60s, 70s or 80s.
        How things have regressed!

    2. Allan – “no doubt the right-dominated NEC would implement a cut-off date so as to disqualify all those who joined after that date – ie the left-wingers who rejoined to vote for the left challenger.”

      That has already been done. It was set by Conference at 6mths for any leadership election.

      1. Steve H….Stephen why are you so frightened of democracy.IF you are on course then the public will acknowledge this but unfortunately only a day after the dear leaders great declaration “that did little to inspire and even less on trust even amongst the rightwing.The polls that usually give a boost after a conference for all the world to see was a flop and the Labour leader along with the defeated ideology of the neo liberal Labour party went into freefall against the worst conservative government in living memory bythe worst so called Opposition party in living memory..IT could have been so much better Stephan and I know you are becoming increasingly disillusioned with the knight.and his imbeciles like screeching,hodge and philips…..not forgetting Nandy..very sad!for such a burden as trying to defend the indefensible.regards Stephan.and keep safe.

      2. WTF, get married, get a car take the test pass the test, drive someone over, travel round the world, learn a language, travel round the world leisurely, get locked up and released, knocked up, change your name, gender, get divorced… we know what the LABOUR party leaders think – we hate democracy!

      3. charming64 – WTF

        I did, over 25 years ago, and we are still very happy thanks
        We have several
        I passed my driving test first time aged 17, I also have licence to drive a tank (that really is fun, you should try it)
        I’ve lived and worked in several countries on 3 different continents including 2 separate volunteer posts in Africa.
        I’ve never been locked up, but I think I’ll give that one a miss, thanks.

        Obviously some on here were unaware that the 6mth rule had been brought in for leadership elections. I would have thought that this was important information for those who may be considering whether or not to continue as Labour party members.
        Was it wrong (and if so why?) to inform them of this rule change?

    3. Forgive me for asking Joseph, but how does what YOU said relate to what *I* said – ie the points I made?

      As for any potential.’avalanche’, how is THAT likely to benefit the left? In the final analysis, the Red Tories couldn’t really care less if the Blue Tories are in power, and everything else is just theater to maintain the illusion to the proles that the two parties are in opposition to each-other AND that they – the proles – live in a democracy.

      1. Allan I again acknowledge your point….but refer you to the song “Walk on” almost a anthem to the people of the brave city of Liverpool where the fight against a fascist.. dictator are the strongest.

      2. Oh, I see, so THAT’s how what you said relates to what I said! Thanks for explaining it to me Joe.

        So what you’re saying is that despite the fact that the SCG are six short of the numbers required to nominate a candidate to challenge Starmer, and despite the fact that 120.000 plus left-wing members have left the party, AND counting, all we need to do is Walk On and it’ll all be just dandy.

        So how long do you think the left are gonna be walking?

        PS So who was it that told you 300,000 members had left the party just out of curiousity? And when?

  3. Phil Bevin describes Sir keir Starmer as a “Political minnow” and I believe that to be a very accurate assessment.IT begs the question of why a man from conservative Surrey with a knighthood attatched as a establishment lacky should have ever been allowed to stand for election as leader of the Labour party.with just five years experience in the Labour party as a elected mp..and non whatsoever at CLP and branch level.We all know how boring CLP and branch mtgs can be..but at least they educate what being a member of the democratic socialist Labour party entails and gives a broader understanding of Labour party history and the membership that helped to build it…Would Starmer have got through the branch mtgs or the CLP mtgs without being identified as a “Plant”for the wishes and aspirations of a unknown source.? I very much doubt it and if and its a big IF the Labour party survives then never again must relaxation or rigging be allowed and tolerated to elect the leader of the Labour party…..and thats without mentioning the illegal funding .

    1. The truth is just too embarrasing though, Joseph: 50-something percent of the membership voted for him because the MSM told them to

      1. qwertboi

        Paul Mason – a once respected figure on the left – did a lot of shilling for Starmer. Bizarrely, he’s still at it ,supporting Starmer and still maintains Starmer is ‘of the left’ ,this, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary. Mason is a bit weird. He’s very pro Lisa ‘neocon’ Nandy and pro-Nato, pro nuclear weapons and wants a huge increase in the UK defence budget. He spends his time pushing what are essentially Neocon foreign policy positions by framing them in leftist arguments.

        His latest obsession is with rising fascism, and the risks of online extremism and misinformation. Govt secrecy and media omissions are more pernicious to democracy and informed choice, than misinformation imho. Misinformation can ultimately be fact checked and dismissed. State secrecy(classification) that seeks to hide everything: the trivial; the politically inconvenient, right through to serious crimes is the greatest threat our western democracies face. We are being betrayed by those entrusted to protect as they hiding behind official secrecy and compliant media. But Mason won’t be saying any of that.

      2. Andy
        What sort of idiot is Paul Mason if on the one hand his latest obsession is rising Fascism while on the other hand he is doing his utmost to bolster arch Fascist Starmer and his Fascist shadow cabinet.
        Maybe Paul does not think proscribing organisations, expelling Jews and Socialists from the party and preventing them from holding political office is reminiscent of the Nazis. If that is the case he’s even more of a fool that I thought.

      3. Smartboy – Mason rarely criticises Starmer, always referring to the party’s bureaucracy etc, as if Starmer is some helpless bystander rather than being the main antagonist in this war against the party’s left. In the 2020 leadership campaign Mason alleged Rebecca Long-Bailey(RLB) was the ‘choice of the Stalinists’, and Starmer was the quote : “no-brainer choice for anti-capitalist” LP members.

        Absurd now, looking back, maybe, but Mason isn’t some thicko. It all seems really quite underhand and almost sinister. Especially given the private one-to-one meetings he held with Starmer.

      4. Andy Don’t disagree with you. Mason is no friend of the Left .

    2. It’s not just that Starmer only had “five years experience in the Labour party as a elected mp.” before standing for Leadership.
      In 2015 he had zero political experience or track record before being fast-tracked into an ultra safe seat as a Parliamentary candidate and normal rules breached to allow him to stand. No elected political positions (e.g. Councillor, never been a candidate anywhere, no reputation as a profound political thinker , no policies – nothing!). The nearest he’d come before that to political activity was guidance he issued as DPP that benefit claims made in error even if pennies was to be treated as serious fraud in an attempt to prop up Tory demonisation of unemployed and low-paid.
      Despite that as soon as he arrived in HoC he was being pushed to stand as Leader.

      1. iamcrawford – Wasn’t it Frank Dobson that asked Keir to stand and wasn’t he elected by his CLP in the normal way?

        “The human rights lawyer saw off four challengers to win the right to contest the Holborn and St Pancras seat being vacated by the former Cabinet minister Frank Dobson after 34 years………..
        …..”The other candidates in the race to defend Dobson’s 9,942 majority in the central London constituency were lawyer Raj Chada, council leader Sarah Hayward, doctor Patrick French and West Hampstead councillor Angela Pobe.

  4. I remain convinced the purpose of Starmer is to destroy the Labour Party on behalf of his establishment paymasters

    1. Starmer is here to give us American style bipartisanship. Remember TINA. There is no alternative.

      Think two sides of the same coin. Or as I prefer, two cheeks of the same backside.

  5. Starmer needs to stay.

    Starmer and his Labour need a loss bigger than Corbyn. We all know the skullduggery that went on behind the scenes. The Blairites will know their loss is real.

    Then there’s the moosetick infestation of Labour by the right. And they are like the Lernaean Hydra. There is no Hercules is Labour. Better they expire in the fire of the phoenix, no?

    Finally, just who in the PLP is fit enough to take the reins? To keep the duplicitous shits in line? There’s barely a handful of MPs in Labour that are trustworthy. Any jellyfish that goes with the current is a liability, as demonstrated in recent history by jellyfish towards Corbyn (timed resignation etc (which threw away an absolutely massive Brexit result advantage as the right knew! ))

    You can only beat Starmer at his own game. And, just like they did, the left will be able to force change (again (the cul-de-sac of Hope… Going nowhere as usual))

    1. Dead right, NVLA.

      Starmer needs to stick around till Boris calls a snap election. Once the RW suffer a heavy election defeat, their USP about being “serious politicians” and “the only kind of Labour party who can win power” will be toast and they’ll have nothing else left to offer, no stick to beat the left with. Enter the younger generation and the embarrassment of riches they bring, which George Peel refers to above.

      Can’t happen soon enough!

      1. Timfrom – It must be disappointing when you have to admit that the current crop of lefty politicians aren’t up to the job.

      2. Yes it is. Being a habitual glutton for punishment, I also support Spurs. The lack of a winning mentality is writ large on both and by now actually winning anything is so unfamiliar it might be regarded with suspicion and even be deemed a little bit vulgar! We’re hoping an Andy Burnham will turn up when the transfer window opens, but till then at least Harry Kane isn’t thumping in hat-tricks for the opposition! (In fact he isn’t thumping them in at all, Europa Conference League aside…)

      3. Plenty of projection here from the small chunky one trying to divert attention from the un-electability of the extreme centerist’s.

      4. I’m surprised Tariq Ali’s brilliant phrase isn’t more widely used. Sums them up perfectly!

  6. “The longer Starmer stays, the more talented people will be side-lined or purged, and the smaller Labour will get, until it’s support dries up completely and it is no longer a viable electoral force.”

    To me, it seems to be exactly the point of Starmer… why? I would guess that a Labour government still including a handful of honest people would be a real threat to a few. Starting with the architects of the Iraq war (mainly Blair) who, in any civilised country, could face a lengthy jail term for lying to the nation, then the press who wouldn’t want to see a Leveson II, to a few human rights violating regimes (many of which Blair is advising for a huge fee) who risk losing diplomatic friendship (who gets constantly the rap at the UN yet keep their territory expanding and displacement of civilian populations policies well in place) and arms deals (to bomb civilian populations creating one of the worse famine ever)…

    A slightly left leaning elected Labour Party in the UK would represent quite a threat to so many badly behaved international actors (especially Blair) that it cannot be left to happen.

  7. The sooner a challenge to Starmer’s leadership is done the better. I cancelled me DD during Conference, but would be willing to pay the arrears if their is a challenge in order to be able to vote in the leadership election.
    I am afraid the SCG cannot wait, they would have to try and persuade Barry Gardiner to stand for leader and give him their votes.

    1. If you have resigned and later rejoin then you have a six-month wait until you can vote in an election for the leader.

  8. Thank you for this article. Having attended conference,and somehow not been ejected,can I offer one,perhaps irrelevant comment. Years ago delegates attending conference would very often be ordinary working men,and less frequently,women. You would talk to posties,dockers and miners. This year I was struck by the amount of young men in sharp suits making their way to the venue. What’s more when trying to leaflet them about a minimum wage they would,at best,walk past as if you didn’t exist or more frequently sneer and make some unpleasant comment.If these are tomorrows leaders God help us all.

    1. My condolences Jim…Youve done your best and somtimes its a wasted journey and effort with the nu nu Labour party.I would expect a resolution soon that it was all the knights fault and a unity candidate will be found maybe a Gardner or somone else who will unite under a Social democratic party with socialists tolerated unlike now.So its back to the future with a Harold Wilson figure a good talker and we are back were we started before the socialist revival under Corbyn….Everybodys happy ☺and we are still singing the red flag….Unfortunately I wont be there to see it thank god.

      1. Sadly Joseph,if memory serves Starmer had left the stage and the hall,already half empty,had emptied further before we sang The Red Flag. Says it all really.

    2. My wife attended Conference & she commented that there were gangs of sharp suits patrolling in & around the hall & ‘bullying’anyone they chose. A lot of intimidation.

      1. Steve Richards-

        Can only imagine the guardian headlines had this intimidation(esp. of females) happened under Corbyn. Under Corbyn’s leadership the party and conference were generally jovial, with camaraderie among delegates and an easy going atmosphere. PLP right-wingers had to stage various theatrics, inside and outside conference, to make it look like a sinister, hostile place at the urging of their equally weird media friends.

        Under Starmer it literally is that sinister, hostile place, and the media, absurdly, claim this is a vast improvement over what went before under Corbyn.

        We live in a country in which the media present a reversed version of reality : good is bad, and bad is good. What a warped f’ckin placed.

  9. From what has been said the sooner the better for a change .. I
    thought there where manoeuvres from all sides so I would
    hope that the left has got someone in mind.

    I would (again) suggest Dawn Butler as someone that no-one
    would dare oppose as a Candidate.

    I think it was someone from the Media Show who said NEXT time
    (if there was one) the left should make sure there was back up
    for their successful leader.

    Recall too the excellent piece from the first time delegate in
    that he (or she) will stay in the Labour Party .. and Corbyns:

    “It is THE Labour Party .. OUR Labour Party ..”

    Well lets get it back !

    1. Good reading in the Canary “A weekend of woes for calamity Starmer,” …mentions a few things including a defection of up to 3Labour Mps to the Tory party?…I guess its like taking coal to Newcastle…!

      1. Well centrist dad, I’d have thought you would if you lived here. However, it’ll be the three most likely to lose their seats to the Tories. You can always trust an MP to put career before party.

      2. lundiel – …and your evidence for this is?

        Mohammed Yasmin Yasin. An easy mistake to make when you are plucking names out of thin air.

      3. Logic.

        All that farting around with HTML over a Google auto correction. You’re an obsessive looney.

      4. lundiel – your ‘logic’ obviously doesn’t stand for much.

        ps – Not if you use an HTML editor.

    2. HolbyFanMw
      As long as it is a history maker who promises to make JC Chair for Life then it will be the ONE who has the wit to jump first

  10. I agree with everything Phil has written and with most of the comments. However I can see no comments on Phil’s reference to the emerging attacks on Ed Milliband.
    Ed Milliband while not a Socialist is a left of centre Jew who in 2014 incurred the ire of the likes of actress Maureen Lipman for condemning the Israeli saturation bombing of Gaza (I remember she used an almost identical speech to attack and vilify Jeremy Corbyn a few years later). It is likely therefore that Ed will be demoted or otherwise sanctioned ( maybe they will resurrect his 2014 speech, Lipmans antisemitism accusations and suspend/expel him or maybe they’ll just side line him to the back benches) and thus the shameful purge of Anti apartheid non Zionist Jews will continue.
    The current leadership will not rest until every member Jewish or otherwise is a Friend of an Apartheid state. The next move will be to make open support for Israel a compulsory condition of Labour Party membership. Starmer must go.

  11. Were this the Tory party’s leadership, the media calls for a change at the top would, by now, be deafening. Iain Duncan Smith’s, ‘the quiet man is turning up the volume’ 2003 conference speech was probably better received among their rank and file than Starmer’s “The focus of the toolmaker'” was. But due to consistently low party polling and low personal ratings akin to Starmer’s, the media cacophony grew so loud Tory MPs moved against IDS early – he never fought an election.

    Labour members & ordinary Labour inclined voters, don’t have that media coercion factor, urging Labour MPs to act; in fact the media are working to prop Starmer up, safe in the knowledge his Labour represent no threat whether in power or out of power. Labour are effectively a neutralised captured force under Starmer. The opinion pieces claiming “Starmer makes Labour a credible force again”, in reality they’re saying he’s done precisely the opposite.

    And who’d want Labour to win under Starmer anyway? Hypothetically, let’s just imagine the party were “20% ahead” as Blair said any other leader would be when Corbyn was leader. Starmer & Reeves will likely present a bland, anodyne ,centrist manifesto have max five years in power, change nothing. Then the Tories would say thanks for keeping our seats warm, and return for another 20 years in power stint. Normal service resumed.

    He’s got to go and the sooner the better.

    1. Andy, I agree. He must go. I agree with – the sooner the better – too. However, that will only be the start of a long process, and who knows how it will play out. There is a significant minority in the LP that believes the LP should follow business as usual whilst giving out sweeties to the majority whilst the wealthy get the rest. Their view is that giving out sweeties is better than what the Tories do, so it’s a good thing. There is, also, a smaller number who believe that politics is like football – tribal. They think that the only thing that matters is that the LP wins. Doesn’t matter what lies they tell or what dreadful stuff they do when they’ve won. (A bit like the Arsenal supporters when George Graham was manager). It’ll be a long haul overcoming that lot and by that time the country, and the planet, may well have gone too far to save. We’ve got to try though.

      1. goldbach- Yep, there are some who put winning above all else. As if winning is an end in itself and what the winner does with power is largely irrelevant. This is so wrong headed imho. Power is a means to implement transformational policy or it is meaningless. People need to ask themselves, what they are fighting for in trying to put Starmer in power?

        Starmer is far, far worse than Blair was in 1997. In 1997, the left’s discomfort with the party’s New Labour centrist direction, was mitigated by a full policy cupboard – radical policies, many of which were inherited by Blair, some legacy he dare not drop .Starmer offers no radical change, nothing. Members are literally working just to put people in who claim they’ll be better managers of the status quo. And judging by his lies and the party’s authoritarianism he could actually be dangerous. Everyone remembers how they felt in 2003 when Blair simply ignored 2m marching against the Iraq war,, do people really want to feel like that under an arrogant PM Starmer?

      2. Andy – “Transformational policy” is meaningless without that power to implement it.

      3. SteveH – Unless Tory support collapses – not impossible, but highly unlikely – what evidence do you have that Starmer or the people around him have a path to power?

        Starmer has dismissed supporting proportional representation, ruled out a progressive alliance, or any cooperation with other parties, “either before or after an election” in that FT interview . So without working with the SNP , Lib Dems , Greens Plaid C etc . How on earth do you think they are going to find themselves in power?

        2010 Brown 29%
        2015 Ed M 30%
        2017 Corbyn 40%
        2019 Corbyn 32%

        And which election would an objective observer looking at UK politics for the first time, urge the party to learn the lessons from? New Labour’s centrism, isn’t some secret election winning sauce, it’s been done and was previously heavily rejected. And Starmer certainly isn’t Blair c.1997.

      4. Andy – All 4 results have their own lessons, particularly the loss of 60 seats.

      5. Andy -It was the Unions that voted down the PR Motion
        79.51% of CLP delegates backed the motion but 95.03% of affiliates voted against.

      6. “Andy – “Transformational policy” is meaningless without that power to implement it.”

        And less than meaningless without the intention

      7. “Andy – story starred Sir Keir ‘Calamity’ Rodney Starmer and a motley crew of People’sVoteAll 4 results have their own lessons, particularly the loss of 60 seats.”

        Yes and the story about the loss of 60 seats at GE19 starred a certain Sir Keir Rodney Starmer (‘Calamity’ to his friends) and the People’s Vote crew.

  12. I’ve been following this chat with interest and I want to know who is the new leader all the Starmer haters want who it is thought will lead the party to victory under a ‘Corbynite’ manifesto? Is it Diane? Laura (already summarily ejected by her constituency voters)? Burgon? Then who? Where’s the courage to name names. The answer is Nobody.
    The electorate have shown they don’t want a UK hating, Palestine loving (we all know it’s a useful and currently acceptable proxy for anti semitism) team of economic idiots in power. If they did Jeremy would be PM and Diane would be Home Sec by now! Get real everyone and get back on the medication.

    1. PC
      For the economically illiterate like yourself, what is left for neo liberalism to pull out of the bag
      What can they do next, answers on the back of a 1st Class stamp

      1. Doug – You won’t convince a Daily Mail reader. As they used to say in the East End. “e ain’t worf it.”

    2. Wakey wakey Mr 🇮🇱 citizen, Starmer’s in charge, he’s just had a hugely successful conference and dropped another point behind. He’s got no chance of winning the next election, his only hope is the election after next, if he lasts that long.

    3. PC, so in 2017 – despite all the smears and demonisation – the electorate came very close to voting in a Labour government, and but for the Blairites working in the party machinery to sabotage Jeremy’s chances they would have probably won. And the smearers then trebled down on their smearing as a consequence.

      Anyway, could you elaborate as to how Jeremy and the left are UK hating. The reality is of course that the very opposite is true, and THAT is why the dark fascist forces smeared him and the left on pretty much a daily basis.

      The following is a clip from a Medialens piece posted on December 3rd, 2019:

      Our ProQuest database search of newspaper articles for ‘Corbyn’ and ‘anti-semitism’ shows how intensively the issue has been used to attack Corbyn prior to the looming election on December 12:

      September = 337 hits

      October = 222 hits

      November = 1,620 hits

      While opinions in effect declaring Corbyn a Nazi are widely reported, opinions defending Corbyn by the likes of John Bercow, Gideon Levy, Norman Finkelstein, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky, Jonathan Cook, Michael Rosen and others reach a comparatively small audience on social media but are simply ignored by the establishment press reaching millions.

      Anyway, have you thought of applying for a job with the Sun, or the Mail, or the Express?

    4. Reply to Plain Citizen
      I really feel sorry for you if your post reflects your genuine opinions. You clearly believe what you have been spoon fed by the MSM and don’t seem to realise that you have been made a complete mug of by them.

  13. Next election will be interesting. Boris’s support can drop like a stone, don’t write off SKS yet. But I say again, who is this icon of the left, ‘The king over the water’ perhaps. Who is going to lead the LP remade in a Corbynite fashion, to victory? Response?: Utter Silence!!

    1. The theory of the Great Leader, eh?
      First get your policies right, and have anyone as leader who can articulate them in a lucid fashion and can think on her/his feet.

      This is worth watching (he usually is).

  14. Only absolute knocking bet is
    If the left put up a challenge, Temporary Embarrassment will step down

    1. Doug – Only absolute knocking bet is
      If the left put up a challenge, they will lose.

      1. SteveH
        Temporary Embarrassment stands against a challenger, what is his Brexit position and how long will it last

      2. SteveH isn’t daft. He obsesses about a new ‘left’ Leader of the Labour Party to set the hare running in the path he prefers. Much more salient and interesting is What Name should the ‘left’ give to a new party? Any left leader of Labour, unlikely as that is, would be torn to shreds from the inside let alone from the out. Ask Jeremy. It’s not the easiest route but if there is to be any hope it has to be done. Start with the Name and the Members can chose the leader(s). It will free the mind. And there is a feeling for it, a 2017 atmosphere that has never gone away.

    A Tory party member has been thrown out of the Tory conference after being accused by a woman of seriously assaulting her

  16. And the fact that the Tories are massively supported by Russian oligarchs is re-emerging ..

    Well whodathunkit?

    PS There are a massive number of very able leftists – I just chose
    the one with the most experience in Dawn Butler. Call it intuition ..

      1. It doesn’t signify where she came from – I think we know a lot
        more now than we did then ***..

        When the chips are down ..

        *** (At least I do ..)

  17. Some political lightweights are obsessed with Leaders and clearly believe in the Great Man or Woman of History Thesis.
    This person top down will sort all our problems out and we should build around them or a party around them?
    I want a new Left Wing Democratic Socialist Party which OMOV is grassroots, bottom up, participatory and we are all leaders, and from such a great party a great socialist fighter will emerge.
    As some political lightweights support a Donkey as Labour Leader when they stray into Left/Socialist politics (which they are out of their depth with) perhaps they put the cart before the horse?

    1. Bazza – “I want a new Left Wing Democratic Socialist Party which OMOV is grassroots, bottom up, participatory and we are all leaders,”

      Do you mean a new Left Unity.

      1. Left Unity is a terrible name, it implies sometthing internal when socialists should be reaching outwards. Before Corbyn, when I was fed up with Labour and explored Left Unity but it was factional, full of vanguardists and was overwhelmingly progressive middle class.
        The Party I want is a Left Wing Democratic Socialist Party which has its roots in the diverse working class which is why I hope the poorly paid workers who serve us all in BAFWU and possibly the FBU (if they disaffiliate from Labour) will set up a Left Wing Democratic Socialist Co-ordinating Committee to set the ball rolling, could invite expelled JVL members to send a rep, BLM, BME groups, the small Breakthrough Socialist Party and other unions.
        Your problem is as Terry Pritchett once said: “Those with imagination are often attacked by those with none!”

      2. Bazza – Just because you imagine that something will be success doesn’t mean it will be. I’ll watch with interest.

  18. Re losing the 2019 GE.
    I was walking through London just before the election and a large crowd of Right Wing Labour MPs and members were marching on Parliament chanting “2nd PV! 2nd PV!”
    I noticed at the back of them was Starmer.
    And I said, “What are you following that mob for?”
    He replied, “I have to, I’m it’s Leader!”
    (Adapted from Nye Bevan).

  19. Even if there is only a few people left in the Labour party, Starmer can still win an election if Murdoch decides to back him and turn on Boris. Murdoch decides. Not labour members, not the PLP, not the Tories, just Murdoch. But in any case if he doesn’t win that is finer by the establishment also. I don’t think there is any good reason for the establishment to change the leader of the Labour party, therefore it won’t happen. Starmer will remain until after the election. Mark my words.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: