Analysis comment

Video: Lammy makes clear Starmer’s Labour does not back workers – betrays at least 5 unions

Hypocritical front-bencher says a ‘categorical no’ to support for strikers in two separate interviews on Sunday

Front bench Labour MP David Lammy made it absolutely clear that he and his boss are ‘categorically’ not prepared to back workers striking to protect their jobs and pay – and in the process he betrayed at least five unions and disowned the RMT, whose magnificent solidarity has electrified the nation.

In the course of two short interviews Lammy:

  • said ‘a categorical no’ to supporting workers in their fight
  • refused to back workers from the RMT, CWU, NEU, Unite and Unison
  • talked about workers battling for inflation-matching pay increases after years of real-terms pay cuts as unrealistic and unreasonable
  • dismissed British Airways workers for supposedly demanding a pay rise – just seconds after his interviewer had been perfectly clear that they were trying to reverse a 10% pay cut imposed during the pandemic now that travel is again burgeoning and the airline is thought to be about to announce it is again in profit
  • claimed no ‘serious party of government’ would be seen on a picket line, even though fifty Labour MPs defied Keir Starmer and stood with striking workers last week – and despite Lammy’s own presence on picket lines in the past

Lammy has not been sacked from his role as Shadow Foreign Secretary, so it is clear that he was expressing Keir Starmer’s position. He was, however, rightly censured by Labour members in his constituency:

Under Keir Starmer, Labour is dead as a party of the working class. The unions betrayed (again) today must quickly take steps to end their affiliation with the party and to cut all financial support of Starmer’s shameful and already near-bankrupt outfit, as the Bakers’ union has already done.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and 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 doing its job.

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


    1. So yet AGAIN Steveh posts the first comment, and then proceeds to reply to everyone who posted a comment, and within minutes of them posting their comment, but he’s not a paid shill, and he monitors skwawkbox 16/17 hours a day and posts numerous comments and replies just for fun.

      In just TWO recent threads he posted over 80 comments…… and not only does he regularly post the FIRST comment, but he also posts the LAST comment time and time again – ie in four out of the five last threads, for example.


        “The Shadow Foreign Secretary wrote: “Last Sunday, in a live interview with the BBC, I misheard Sophie Raworth’s question about BA workers. When she said that workers wanted to reverse a previous pay cut of 10%, I mistakenly understood it to mean that they were seeking an above inflation pay rise.
        “I was not across the details of the case. It is right that those of us in public life admit when they have made a mistake. With this in mind, I apologise to all BA workers.”

    2. Why!? Why, would anyone be interested in disinformation and propaganda. Sqwawkbox reported on what likeminded supporters of this channel would find relevant. Why whould anyone want to watch your narrow field disinformation, propaganda, lies and societal brain rot? ‘Oh to get the bigger picture, both sides of the story, etc, etc.’
      Well we already know the bigger picture, both sides of the story, blah, blah, blah, since September 2015!
      Lammy is a Thatcherite Neoliberal Neo-Labour Party TORY, the Neo-Labour Party TORIES are NOT The UK Labour Party they are Thatcherite Neoliberal TORIES, no different to their peers accross the aisle! No manner of BBC, Sun, Sun in Lambskin, etc, pasting, smearing, spinning will ever change that! Whether the Left has a plan, new home, new parties or not.
      Reporting on the important issues that WILL affect the The PEOPLE, rather than the waffling and fluff spun by MSM, designed to damage The PEOPLE’S fight for Justice and Equality, is what Sqwawkbox and others do, we don’t want or need the likes of Lammy’s waffle, fluff and spin that is reserved for you and your ilk, the TORIES!
      You are either FOR The PEOPLE, in Solidarity with The PEOPLE or you are FOR The Old World Order and Against The PEOPLE! The BBC is NOT for The PEOPLE!
      MSM is NOT for The PEOPLE!
      Lammy is NOT for The PEOPLE!
      You BlueSteveH NOT for The PEOPLE!

      1. nellyskelly – Well lots of fine stirring words but you’ve already proudly told us that you don’t currently have a credible alternative to offer and that you don’t have any plans to offer one. Please feel free to correct me but the sum total of your solidarity appears to amount to little more than some comforting empty rhetoric on a leftie blog and a perpetual Conservative government. How is that going to help anyone, least of all the vulnerable.

      2. One TORY is actively is *actively working to prevent a Party FOR The PEOPLE*, poked The PEOPLE in the eye at GE2019 and is a bastard, working for the benefit of the Elites not The PEOPLE.
        Another TORY is a bastard working for the benefit of the Elites not The PEOPLE.
        Who’s got to go?

      3. nellyskelly – Is empty rhetoric all you can offer, where’s the credible alternative?

      4. nellyskelly – …and the credible alternative you are offering is?

  1. Starmers Labour is biting the hand that feeds it. Its about time the Unions stopped using members money to support Starmers Labour – maybe then the party would show the Trade Union movement a bit of respect.

    1. I suppose that depends on what you mean by respect and whether you think that the Labour party being at the beck-and-call of the Unions is a vote winner or not.

      1. Well in that case Labour should be clear on whether they want the association to continue, because that will be the public perception whether it’s true or not.

        The honourable thing would be for Labour to initiate the ending of all union ties. The unions risk being strung along, and may as well be burning their members’ subs as hand them to a party led by people who secretly despise them as much as the Tories.

      2. Andy – I think you are over simplifying the relationship between the Labour party and the Unions.

      3. It is not a question of whether Labour’s support for ..Labour is a vote winner or not, by which you mean ‘wins the approval of Murdoch and Rothermere.’
        It is a question of what is right and whether working people should reconcile themselves to constantly diminishing living standards while corporate and investors profits are rising.
        People are beginning to suffer badly from rising prices in the supermarkets and everywhere else.
        The idea that Labour should maintain neutrality on matters which are of vital concern to working people, their families and pensioners may be a vote winner but it is wrong in the short run and suicidal in the long run.
        The right wing has gone far beyond any policies ever pursued in the past even by traitors like Ramsay Mac and Thomas- there is no excuse of ‘national interest’ here. Lammy and Starmer are putting the interests of Washington and the billionaires above that of the people.

      4. bevin – I suggest you read the transcript of what David Lammy said during his BBC interview.

    2. Keep in mind, that is not Labour, parasite TORIES like Lammy, Starmer, Reeves, Streeting, Dodds, etc infiltrated The UK Labour Party and killed it.
      They prove on every given opportunity that they stand square in the face and against The PEOPLE.
      We have ~10, and Jeremy Corbyn adamant that he will fight for the whip back, fuck knows why, but who knows what that will mean for the UK Labour Party.
      Sure as hell won’t be good for The Neo-Labour Party Occupying TORIES. Like a fly in the ointment, I would prefer it if The PEOPLE stood together and voted out every single last one of the ~180 Occupying Parasite TORIES, even if that results in a minuscule 11 PLP, but a massive UK Labour Movement with candidates fighting for each and every one of 650 seats, for the following GE, with a Parasite, Sabotage, Coup, Conn Artist, Spin Meister free UK Labour Party FOR The PEOPLE NOT The Elites.

      1. skellyknelly – Perhaps if you had a credible party and a leader for people to coalesce behind you might have a point, but you don’t.

      2. nellyskelly – I’m certainly non the wiser for reading your posts but I think that is largely down to you.

  2. You can try and politicize everything Steve H but these people are human beings who have a right to exist.ITs becoming a war like the miners destruction and you have to choose sides.Good or Evil in my opinion and you and your fascist leader have chosen to support the Government and the establishment.of the one percent….These parasites have no understanding of society or the ordinary people but wish to trash the working class and the unions.Why don’t you step back and consider just how youve betrayed yourself and your beliefs over the last two years and think again on your road to disaster.

    1. Joseph – and what did the Labour party ever achieve for the miners when they were not in power?

      1. Reply to Steve H
        During the Miners strike the Labour Party under the leadership of Neil Kinnock sold out the miners. When Labour got into power under PMs Blair and Brown they did nor repeal the anti union legislation brought in by Thatcher to help her defeat the miners and crush the TU movement. It is still in force today.
        Under Kinnock Blair Brown and now Starmer its all one way traffic – the unions give and Labour takes, giving nothing in return. Unions funding Starmers Labour is a complete waste of members money. They need to realise this and make big changes to the current arrangements -the sooner the better

      2. Smartboy – In which case you’ll be relieved to learn that the following policies (along with many others) were announced at the 2021 Labour conference

        • Fair pay agreements. “A Labour government will bring together representatives of workers and employers to negotiate pay and conditions in every sector. Collective bargaining in every sector will end the free market free-for-all that encourages undercutting, exploitation and a race to the bottom.”
        • Give all workers rights from day one in their jobs: sick pay, holiday pay, parental leave and protection against unfair dismissal.
        • Create one, single worker status, banning bogus self-employment.
        • Ban zero-hour contracts and ensure all contracts come with minimum hours and reflect normal working life, requiring notice of shift changes and pay.
        • End fire and rehire. “Labour will end the scandalous practice of fire and rehire once and for all.”
        • Introduce a new right to flexible working as the default, protections for those with caring responsibilities and a right to switch off.
        • Increase statutory sick pay and make it universal.
        • Put mental health and safety on a legal par with physical health and safety, and make sure the laws are enforced by a new, empowered watchdog.
        • Sign into law the new deal for working people within the first 100 days of coming to office.
        • Set up an integrity and ethics commission to “stamp out the Tory sleaze”.

        You can read the views of Tim Sharp (a senior employment rights officer at the TUC) here.

      3. “NOT for the UNDESERVING POOR, for the Upper Middle Classes”

        “10 years for “benefit frsud””
        “10 Years for Protesting Racism glorification”
        “Arrest the Climate Protesters ”
        “Ban the RT and Sputnik ”
        “Don’t you dare get cold feet now”

        “”The Labour Party” is not the party for People out of work”
        “”The Labour Party” will be tougher on benefit claimants than the Conservative Party ”
        “Riots could sweep streets of Britain if immigration is not curbed”

        Where does that lot among many others fit in with your Snake Oil, Fluff and Spin?
        What actions has The Neo-Labour Party TORIES taken to date in parliament regarding any of the above “policies”!? I don’t mean a mention I mean at least put up a battle for action?
        NONE, NEVER, NADA!

      4. nellyskelly – Do you have some links to your list of direct quotes?

      5. Steve H
        I wonder if these conference policies will be implemented or will they be ignored by the leadership just like the anti Apartheid policy on Israel has been ignored. After all in Starmer’s Labour Conference decisions mean nothing and can be binned if the leadership has any problems with them – Starmers democracy in action eh Steve H?

      6. Smartboy – I am surprised that you didn’t already know that the above policies were announced on the conference floor by shadow ministers. I can provide you with links to the transcripts of their conference speeches if you have any doubts,

      7. If they haven’t even once faught for a single one of their SpinPorn “policies” with intent of resolution or change, in 2y6m, it would be utterly foolish to expect a Party who has done nothing but vote against, fight against, blamed and lied to The PEOPLE to implement ANYTHING remotely possitive FOR The PEOPLE.
        The Neo-Labour Party are Thatcherite Neoliberal TORIES, if you are not White, Zionist and Wealthy, you are simply not invited to the party. But they need The PEOPLE’S votes, hence the SpinPorn and Baubles like Lammy and the Socialists!

      8. nellyskelly – Are you saying that you like the policies but don’t trust Keir to implement them. I suppose that’s progress.

      9. As opposed to, so called “Labour” in power and AGAINST THEM?
        TORY is TORY no matter what side of the aisle!
        Suffering under the banner of Conservative TORY or suffering under the banner of Neo-Labour TORY, is suffering no less!
        There is NO CHOICE!
        One must go, hopefully people will be sensible enough and make that the Invasive Parasite Occupiers The Neo-Labour Party TORIES!
        If The PEOPLE want a CHOICE of Opposing Parties, they must be prepared to suffer another term, until a Movement/Party is built on the ashes of the Occupying Parasite Neo-Labour Party TORIES. The overnight option was wasted at GE2019.
        What good is an Opposition Party that doesn’t Oppose? An Opposition Party that stands AGAINST The PEOPLE rather than FOR The PEOPLE and AGAINST The Elites!?

      10. Reply to Steve h
        The unfortunate thing is that the word of Starmer and by extension his front bench is that his word is worth nothing ( 10 pledges). Why do you think they will keep their word on Conference policies.
        The will of conference was made resoundingly clear on Israel but this has been disregarded by the Zionist leader and PLP. They made it absolutely clear where their loyalties lie and its not with the party or Conference. Why then do you think they will implement the policies you refer to if they are ever in a position to do so.

      11. Smartboy – Oh dear,yet more meaningless drivel, where’s the credible alternative?

      12. Steve H
        You and the other trolls and fake socialists who post non stop on this site always resort to insults and jibes when you can’t win the argument. Sometimes its name calling and ranting, other times its posting off topic in order to deflect attention from the issue. You all frequently engage in fake arguments with each other to try to hide the fact that you are all on the same side and invariable if one of you is challenged another tries to come to the rescue.
        What a very sad way to have to earn a living.

      13. Smartboy – Allan also keeps banging on about paid trolls too. But despite his self proclaimed expertise in the field he has yet to come up with any pay rates. I am in the very fortunate position of being retired and knowing that I have enough to never have to work again.
        Apart from being an ordinary Labour party member I have no connection whatsoever with any of the other commentators on these pages and I have never knowingly met or directly communicated with any of them outside these pages. I hope this clears up any misconceptions that you may be harbouring.
        I haven’t noticed many instances of others rushing to my aid, perhaps you could post a couple of links to some examples.

    2. SteveH, if that is Labour’s policy, why are they attacking unions for fighting in the only way they can for precisely those things?

      Labour at the moment supports the theoretical right to strike, but God help anyone who actually exercises that right.

      What you and they seem to forget is that to win power, they not only need to win over new voters, they need to keep the ones they have got. Their current approach is winning over negligible numbers while driving away millions of existing voters.

      Why do you or they think this is the route to electoral victory? It defies all logic.

      1. UV – You claim that Labour are attacking the Unions, I’ve not seen any evidence of this.

      2. “You claim that Labour are attacking the Unions, I’ve not seen any evidence of this.”

        When Labour fails to explain the reason for a strike and defend the strikers’ actions, it is tantamount to attacking the Trade Unions in question.

        Moreover, since said Trade Unions make financial donations to the Labour Party and since this money ultimately comes from the wages of the members who are now on strike, the party is not just attacking the trade unions, but also the workers for whom said trade union is only a collective representation.

        No corporate or personal ‘backer’ would accept such behaviour from Labour.

      1. timfrom – I accept that you may not have intended your comment to be racist which is why I specifically referred to your comment being racist and didn’t say you are racist but the fact remains that all the black people in my family and in the wider community where I live would regard being called an ‘Uncle Tom’ as a racist slur. Why choose to use a slur that is specifically tied to a particular race when there are plenty of other race neutral alternatives.
        Below is a short extract from an article in the Washington Post that you may find informative. I’ve provided the link at the foot of this comment so that you can put the following in the context of the full article. Read the full article and have a think, it may persuade you to change your stance.

        What’s more, whites’ good intentions — their impulse to use “Uncle Tom” to castigate internal foes of black progress — blind them to the fact that they are using a term of derision applied almost exclusively to black people, which puts it in the same league as another word. Williams understood this, answering the charge by replying to Rothstein on Twitter: “Why don’t u just stop dancing around it and call me a n**ger?”
        Finally, white people have no business trying to police authentic black identity. I am not a black person who shouts “racism” every time the sky clouds over; I don’t make a habit of telling whites what they should and shouldn’t do; and I don’t believe in creating white discomfort for its own sake. But white people simply don’t have any moral authority here. The situations in which blacks are so-called Uncle Toms are ones in which whites will never find themselves: not taking a knee during the national anthem at a football game or continuing to work for a boss who unapologetically uses racial slurs. Confronted with the original Tom’s dilemma or its modern-day equivalent, how would you respond? I like to think I would do what Tom does, but I don’t know for sure, and I’m guessing that is true for most people.
        Certainly, any person of any color can face situations in which the choice is between profit or safety, on the one hand, and principle on the other. There are words for a person who makes the less admirable choice. “Coward,” “sellout” or “traitor” would suffice. If the person is black, why use “Uncle Tom,” unless it is to punish the person for his color as well as his behavior?

  3. Steve H Uncle tom is a American slave word for those of the Afrikan \mixed race who chose to be subservient to the “White master” and by doing so enabled the continuation of slavery and brutality on the the USA.You probably dont like the word because it reminds you that your neighbours in the Caribbean bolt hole sufferred greatly from enabler “uncle toms” like yourself…..You should be ashamed of yourselves.and your politics of greed.

  4. Not at all Steve H….I didnt realise you were so touchy “about the subject.Whilst we are chatting did you realise that the first slaves in your islands were Irish sent their by the colonial masters of Britain to the windys and Virginia in the southern states way before the Afrikans arrived.IT was felt that there wasnt enough” uncle tom “types amongst the Irish slaves so they were interbered with the Afikans to get rid of the” disruptive nature of the Irish slaves..That was in the sixteen hundreds and like your lot the hatred of the disruptive influence carrys on in the one percent and the labour…..Hopefully you might meet one of these descendents of the irish \African mix in your Caribbean bolt hole and will make your life a bloody misery along the lines of your labour party who are a abomination and a class enemy of the people.

    1. Joseph – It is not about whether I am ‘touchy’ or not.
      I believe that racism is wrong regardless of how the perpetrators try to dress it up, don’t you?

      1. I have spent a liftime fighting racism,shame youve fallen at the first hurdle ex comrade.Steve H ,sh davidh and centrist dad..amongst other aliases.

      2. The horrendous David Lammy’s stupidity has nothing to do with his ethnicity. He is unbelievably stupid and not very well-informed about much that he proclaims on! It reduced the wonderful Dr Vernon Coleman to tears in one of his vimeo videos about the ‘vaccine’ and whether it could be known to be ‘safe’.

        Then there was Lammy on brexiters:

        “I don’t think that David Lammy is the brightest bulb in the chandelier.

        “But I was astonished at his ignorance in describing people who supported Brexit as Nazis.

        “Indeed, I was so astonished that in an attempt to educate him I posted off a copy of Jack King’s book All Remainers Are Neo-Nazis…..

        “I hoped he might find someone to read it to him so that he could understand that his beloved EU was designed by Nazis – for Nazis. And that means that those who support the EU are supporting a Nazi creation.

        P.S. If you look down the items under Politics on this website you will find an article entitled ‘David Lammy – an enthusiastic Remainer’. If you haven’t read it, please do. You may be surprised/horrified by what you read.” – Copyright Vernon Coleman May 2019″

      3. qwertboi – I am struggling to understand how my objections to timfrom’s comment are in any way related to article you have linked to.

  5. For someone claiming they’re: ‘happy to be ignored’ he certainly makes plenty of bullshit comments designed for nothing more than provocation. 😙🎶

    One word sums up lammy


    But of course, anyone calling him an ‘Uncle Tom’ is ‘racist’.

    1. Toffee – I accept that the narrow minded can sometimes find the truth challenging and provocative but that is their self inflicted issue not mine.

      Don’t be ridiculous, I’ve never heard a white person called that, have you. Don’t you agree that racism is wrong regardless of who it is directed at.

      1. Toffee – Could you clarify what you meant when you said “One word sums up lammy – Windrush”?
        Do you disapprove of David Lammy’s campaign on behalf of the Windrush victims?

      2. david lammy voted against the 2014 immigration bill that set the way for the Windrush scandal.

        …Except he didn’t

        He was absent


        david lammy compared leave voters to nazis and thought the UK should remain – to protect worker’s rights.

        The same nazis who not only didn’t join picket lines, but who banned strikes. (WHAT would pederast enabler, madge hodge say?)

        And the same EU that asserts the right to collective bargaining, apparently 😙🎶

        Oh I DO hope that if he’s found guilty of failing to declare interests that the standards committee nail his fucking feet to the floor.

        And keef, too.

        They won’t, though, more’s the pity.

      3. Toffee – Would his vote have made a difference and have you checked whether his absence was paired?
        Have you forgotten that Jeremy absented himself and the entire Shadow Cabinet for the Chilcot vote.

      4. Excuses, excuses, excuses. 😴

        What was his excuse for nominating Corbyn?

        Oh – he’s staggered that some with antisemitic views are still in the party

        …While casually comparing leave voters (some Jewish, no doubt) to a regime that wiped out six million Jews 😙🎶

      5. Toffee – I’m not making any excuses for myself or anyone else.
        I asked 2 straightforward and legitimate questions that I naturally presumed you would be able to answer from the research you;d already done,

      6. And let’s not forget that a disproportionate amount of those found by smarmerist labour to have these so-called ‘antisemitic views’ are themselves, Jews.

    2. Toffee – All the black people that I know would regard being called that to be an offensive racist slur, do you think they are being over sensitive. Why is it hypocritical for Lammy to campaign on behalf of the Windrush generation.

  6. I was talking about you. Not to you

    But you’re happy to be ignored. So much so, that you just HAD to reply with your usual bilge.

    The TRUTH is, lammy’s a LYING HYPOCRITE. In a party choc-full of lying hypocrites

    And you’re an unwanted, unwelcome, foreign-based lying, hypocritical interloper who doesn’t give a toss about the BRITISH worker, so sod off and die.

    That racist enough for ya?

    1. Toffee – Well no. I don’t agree with your analysis but I don’t see anything that is racist in your 5:09am comment.

  7. Maybe someone ought to inform lammy that bame people are also involved in these disputes/ strikes…😙🎶

  8. From the transcript:

    We cannot form a government if there aren’t people in the country who would vote Conservative but are choosing to vote Labour. That’s what we saw in Wakefield.

    Except the numbers themselves neither suggest nor substantiate that! Labour lost 4,759 votes compared with 2019, so there’s no evidence of any transfer of votes from Tory to Labour in Wakefield, only that the Labour vote held up much better to end up with a 12.7% swing.

    In Tiverton, on the other hand, the LDs gained 13,730 votes, with Labour losing 11,092 and the Tories 19,500, which does at least suggest some Tories switched their vote but not to Labour, whose voters appear to have voted LD en masse. Either that, or they stayed at home and hordes of Tories voted LD. Or, maybe it was somewhere in between?

    While obviously it doesn’t suggest a LibDem national resurgence, as the West Country was a Liberal stronghold in years past but that’s not the point. Trying to make out that Tory voters are switching to Labour when the numbers don’t actually show it, is.

    Yes, there was a 12.7% swing in Wakefield but not necessarily because thousands of voters switched sides, as is clearly suggested in Tiverton, but just as plausibly because less votes were lost – it certainly doesn’t show definitively votes going from Tory to Labour, as Lammy tries to claim!

    1. Uncle tom Lammy has made a lucrative business out of exploiting the black people of N.London especially when the riots started.He’s now moved on and betrays any colour so long as theyre working class.and are vunerable to greasy lawyers….ITs about time the labour party banned bottom feeders from joining the labour party,and just think were we would be without them now.?

    2. There is of course not a shred of evidence that a single Tory voted Labour in Wakefield. All we know is that the Labour vote dropped by almost 5,000 votes. WE know that the Tory vote for the worst PM of the worst Tory government in the last 100 years dropped even more. The rest of the BS about “swing” and percentages* is merely a statistical absurdity. *Bear in mind that we are comparing a GE in December, cold, dark days, with a by-election in midsummer, when a stroll down to a polling station has much to attract it! And of course the inevitable “shot across the bows” for even decent governments is common in mid-term, never mind this s***show of a government and the underlying message for Labour to draw from this by-election was that it was nothing short of disastrous, no matter what nonsense Keith or Lammy spout.

    3. Labour was helped in Wakefield by the fact that the Conservatives were fighting two by elections at the same time.
      What would the result have been like if that had not been the case?

      “Keenly aware that if Labour did not win the seat back then a leadership challenge would follow, Starmer had ordered the party to throw everything at Wakefield. He visited three times and ordered his shadow cabinet to follow suit…

      Nadeem Ahmed, the Conservative candidate, received rather less support from Tory party HQ, which was preoccupied with trying and failing to defend its 24,000 majority in the byelection on the same day in Tiverton and Honiton in Devon.”

  9. How does this look… Man on £82,000p.a using taxpayer-subsidised restauarants and bars, claiming over £200,000 in expenses, (plus additional “donations for more office staff”) and charging about £1,000 per HOUR for speaking engagements (including for “preparation”) when we might expect him to be working for us, tells people who had a 10% pay cut that all of “us” would like a “10% rise” (to bring us up to what we WERE earning before covid, and they should not expect such a rise(fall) in future.

    Gee thanks Dave, no sign of right-wing hypocrisy, “Let’s support the bosses” there!

  10. My late, close friend who was born in Jamaica and came to the UK as a young man, referred to Trevor Phillips as “the former black man”. I’m sure that he would have thought the same of Lammy.

    1. No Lammy is black. 1960s imported slang from a criminal minority in a foreign land is meaningless and embarrassing to ordinary black people who would never sink so low. But we are never asked our opinions. Whenever people use the MF word I wince with horror and revulsion. Of course one would need to have some knowledge of history. Anyone, black, brown or white who uses that word or the n word in front of my kin will be carrying their faces home in an amazon box.

  11. 7. Strengthen workers’ rights and trade unions

    ….Repeal the Trade Union Act.

    Does this still hold or not? At a minimum the unions should demand clarification and a public reaffirmation of this pledge.

    Much talk of Tory defections. No such talk under Corbyn or Miliband iirc.

  12. No apologies for this diversion from the ridiculous, to the truly important.
    Nils Melzer is UN Special Rapporteur on Torture.
    He wrote this opinion piece …
    … and submitted it to The Guardian, The Times, The Financial Times, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian, The Canberra Times, The Telegraph, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Thomson Reuters Foundation, and Newsweek.
    For some reason, none of them chose to publish it. Maybe they think that a UN Special Rapporteur isn’t sufficiently authoritative.

      1. Steve – None – In extradition cases the CPS/DPP are not the prosecuting authority the CPS adopts a very different role. They are not the ones making the decisions. The CPS doesn’t get to choose which extradition cases it takes on or decide their outcome. Cases are assigned to it by a separate authority and the judiciary make the decisions.
        The duty of the CPS in extradition cases is to act as the agent of the country requesting the extradition. It is similar but not the same as a client/solicitor relationship in that the country requesting the extradition instructs the CPS to act on its behalf.
        I can dig out a link to evidence that confirms this relationship in detail if you are interested.

      2. We’ll never know because, quite coincidentally, all the relevant records disappeared.
        “Starmer was head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) from 2008-13, when it handled Assange’s proposed extradition to Sweden to face questioning about sexual assault allegations.
        The CPS has admitted destroying key emails relating to the Assange case, mostly covering the period when Starmer was director.”
        The Grauniad reported at the time

      3. goldbach – …and yet various FOI requests to the email recipients despite other revelations haven’t revealed any emails from Keir regarding the Assange case.🤔

      4. It is instructive to read things correctly rather than making assumptions. Or is the objective to misrepresent statements?
        The text says :
        ““Starmer was head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) from 2008-13, when it handled Assange’s proposed extradition to Sweden to face questioning about sexual assault allegations.
        The CPS has admitted destroying key emails relating to the Assange case, mostly covering the period when Starmer was director.”
        It is clear that the CPS sent emails which were destroyed.
        It would be useful if you could name the organisations which were the subject of the FOIs to which you refer, and if you could provide links to the responses. I assume that they were UK bodies since UK FOI legislation applies to UK bodies.

      5. goldbach – I believe that there was the Swedish equivalent of an FOI in 2015. I don’t have a link for you but it shouldn’t be too hard to find if you’re interested.

      6. Possible Swedish FOI?
        Just post the link to the article from which you got “yet various FOI requests to the email recipients despite other revelations haven’t revealed any emails from Keir regarding the Assange case”.

      7. goldbach – My recollection was it revealed that the CPS lawyer had discouraged the Swedes from coming to London to interview Assange.
        Can you remember the source of everything you’ve read. If you are interested then find it for yourself

  13. Lammy, along with Gove were at the bilderburg meeting. Chatham House rules on what went on.

  14. What I find difficult to understand is the casual warmongring thats been adopted by the media and politicians that to me a outsider “looking in who has over the last few years lost contact with just how much things have dramatically changed in the Western world.I didnt realise until today after having a horrible nightmare about a nuclear attack on Britainand the “fallout from a war with Russia.Somone mentioned the plan to bring nucluer weapons from the USA to Britain just before I went to bed last night……funny how it haunted my sleep and I now wonder was it a premonition based on common sense.Where is this all going to end and whats made these so called leaders of europe and Britain dance to the march of the USA war machine.into oblivion….apology for going off message but people like lammy and the party are just not worth talking about anymore when billions of lives are on the line.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: