Keir Starmer

[domalino]

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

Sometimes democracy has to run its course and it's just not right to demand or reject elections based upon whether you like or dislike a party. I think a GE is necessary now simply because Labour has no mandate. I thought the same when the Tory government was dragged out under Sunak although he did eventually give the game up.

With the current state of things this is classic ground for a left leaning Labour to lead but where are they? There isn't even a candidate to challenge Starmer let alone a government in waiting. Some quarters are now scrambling to find a seat for Burnham, this isn't democracy, it's a party clinging onto power via any means except an election.

I don't see what other choice there is because as of today Reform will win the election in some form or another. It is just a simple question of by how much and whether they will need to get into bed with somebody. If Farage turns out to be a twat then he'll get voted out next time around because that's what democracy is.

Fighting stupidity is indeed difficult but recognising reality is also important. If a majority within the electorate want a Farage government then that's where we're going to go eventually unfortunately.

Stupidity put into the hands of power can have a very damaging and lasting effect going forward.

Trump and the MAGA goons have already demonstrated that - not keen to see the UK following such traits personally.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I've said before I don't even like Farage.

I just think it's a bit pathetic digging up 12 year old, caveated comments, and trying to spin that into saying Farage is a Putin supporter. It's desperate stuff.

As I do when people try to deny what is already out there - if you get my drift ?

There are any number of desperate posts on here already - no ?

 

[mosssideblue]

Jess Phillips resignation statement in full​

Dear Keir
I want to start by first saying that we have worked closely together on Violence Against Women and Girls for many years and I have no doubt you have genuine knowledge and desire to rectify this dreadful social ill. We have started to make steps towards change whilst in government and I have been grateful for your support.
However, it would be remiss of me not to say that real change and direction in this area usually came from threats made by me in light of catastrophic mistakes. The Mandelson saga whenever it bubbled up made Number 10 kick into gear on the subject in order to prove our credentials. I will never waste a crisis to make advancements for women and girls and so demands were made and some were met.
I think you are a good man fundamentally, who cares about the right things however I have seen first-hand how that is not enough. The desire not to have an argument means we rarely make an argument, leaving opportunities for progress stalled and delayed.
Over a year ago I presented solutions, long worked on by brilliant civil servants that would end the ability for children in the UK to take naked images of themselves. 91% of online child sex abuse is self-generated by children groomed, tricked and exploited in to abuse. The technology exists to stop children being able to take naked images of themselves. We could make this possible on every phone and device in the country. We could stop this abuse. It has taken me a year to get you to agree to even threaten to legislate in this space. Not legislate, just threaten. This is the definition of incremental change. Nothing bold about it. The announcement was meant to be in March, I’m still on a promise this will happen in June, I’ve given up believing it. How many children were left without a safety net in the time we dilly dallied and worried about tech bosses?
This is just one example.Labour governments come around rarely is the constant refrain at the moment. It’s true they are precious. Every Labour government in my and my family’s lifetime has forged progress that changed our country and the world for the better. I know you care deeply, but deeds, not words are what matter. I’m not sure we are grasping this rare opportunity with the gusto that’s needed and I cannot keep waiting around for a crisis to push for faster progress.
Decency is vital, calm curiosity is also needed, but so too are fight and drive required. Have a row, push back, make arguments, bring people along. Standing up and being counted can’t always be workshopped. Politics is as much about feelings as policy, especially at the moment.
I want a Labour government to work and I will strive as I always have for its success and popularity, but I’m not seeing the change I think I, and the country expect, and so cannot continue to serve as a minister under the current leadership.

Well constructed, well said Jess

 

[mosssideblue]

Sky News has just reported some details of what went on at the Cabinet meeting today. Apparently, Starmer told the Cabinet that no one has followed the correct process for replacing him, so he was not even going to discuss it at the meeting. If anyone in Cabinet wanted to discuss it, he would have a one-on-one meeting with them. But when the meeting closed and he was asked for a one-on-one meeting, he refused to have it.

Sky in the boardroom, very transparent from the government that

 

[Chippy_boy]

Both these things are enough to rule him out of being next PM, the latter should be posing a risk of him seeing the inside of a jail cell, not only are the press ignoring it, the political Left aren’t using it merely enough as they should be, it should be a huge story and the end of his career, but for some reason even his detractors don’t realise that.

I agree it's not getting the air time you might imagine, given the scale of it. However, Googling (since I knew little of the detail), I find that the £5m donation was received before Farage was an MP or had even decided to run. More importantly that personal gifts do not need to be declared and that is what Farage is claiming.

The jury is out on whether that response is reasonable or acceptable. It may not be.

But the reason I chose to quote you was I like you would have thought it's curtains for Farage if the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner find against him. But apparently the range of sanctions are:

• A formal reprimand or censure on the parliamentary record
• A suspension from the Commons for a defined period
• A fine from the Electoral Commission

None of these automatically disqualify someone from becoming PM. There is no legal mechanism that bars an MP found to have breached the register of interests from leading a party or serving as PM.

As I now understand it, there's a legal gap where breaking parliamentary rules are not necessarily illegal, specifically that the legal obligation to declare only applies to sitting MPs, which Farage was not.

BUT... This is one hell of a distraction from the STARMER discussion thread isn't it!

 

[Ban-jani]

I agree it's not getting the air time you might imagine, given the scale of it. However, Googling (since I knew little of the detail), I find that the £5m donation was received before Farage was an MP or had even decided to run. More importantly that personal gifts do not need to be declared and that is what Farage is claiming.

The jury is out on whether that response is reasonable or acceptable. It may not be.

But the reason I chose to quote you was I like you would have thought it's curtains for Farage if the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner find against him. But apparently the range of sanctions are:

• A formal reprimand or censure on the parliamentary record
• A suspension from the Commons for a defined period
• A fine from the Electoral Commission

None of these automatically disqualify someone from becoming PM. There is no legal mechanism that bars an MP found to have breached the register of interests from leading a party or serving as PM.

As I now understand it, there's a legal gap where breaking parliamentary rules are not necessarily illegal, specifically that the legal obligation to declare only applies to sitting MPs, which Farage was not.

I’ve read that it could be deemed as criminal and the worst case could be a custodial sentence.

With regards to it being before he chose to run as an MP, I find that extremely hard to believe, he’s ran before and it was always on the cards. The £5m donation was a political donation and there’s nothing that will convince me the donor didn’t know he was going to run.

 

[We've got Guardiola]

Stupidity put into the hands of power can have a very damaging and lasting effect going forward.

Trump and the MAGA goons have already demonstrated that - not keen to see the UK following such traits personally.

I could easily argue that the Greens economic plans are stupid and most economists agree but certain people will never agree that's true and ironically they're the same people who say that people who vote Farage are stupid.

The principle of truth however is exactly the same, it's just a different point of view. People are fully willing to overlook blatant stupidity as long as it's a stupidity that they agree with, that's the real problem.

This is the major appeal of centrism at the moment because it typically preaches to avoid abiding by extreme or 'stupid' views by taking a balanced view but look at what has happened. There will never be another centrist government and very few want one, they just want what they want and that includes the extremes of stupidity.

 

[robbieh]

Labour won a stonking FPTP majority in 2024 so under the fixed term parliament act they still have a mandate for three more years. I think they are getting the big decisions right irrespective of how big a twit you think Starmer is.

The reality is Tories are just going to have to wait like we all waited while they shuffled the deck , was it 5 times during 14 years of mayhem.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I agree it's not getting the air time you might imagine, given the scale of it. However, Googling (since I knew little of the detail), I find that the £5m donation was received before Farage was an MP or had even decided to run. More importantly that personal gifts do not need to be declared and that is what Farage is claiming.

The jury is out on whether that response is reasonable or acceptable. It may not be.

But the reason I chose to quote you was I like you would have thought it's curtains for Farage if the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner find against him. But apparently the range of sanctions are:

• A formal reprimand or censure on the parliamentary record
• A suspension from the Commons for a defined period
• A fine from the Electoral Commission

None of these automatically disqualify someone from becoming PM. There is no legal mechanism that bars an MP found to have breached the register of interests from leading a party or serving as PM.

As I now understand it, there's a legal gap where breaking parliamentary rules are not necessarily illegal, specifically that the legal obligation to declare only applies to sitting MPs, which Farage was not.

BUT... This is one hell of a distraction from the STARMER discussion thread isn't it!

Especially if you want to see it that way !!

 

[hampshireblue]

I agree it's not getting the air time you might imagine, given the scale of it. However, Googling (since I knew little of the detail), I find that the £5m donation was received before Farage was an MP or had even decided to run. More importantly that personal gifts do not need to be declared and that is what Farage is claiming.

The jury is out on whether that response is reasonable or acceptable. It may not be.

But the reason I chose to quote you was I like you would have thought it's curtains for Farage if the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner find against him. But apparently the range of sanctions are:

• A formal reprimand or censure on the parliamentary record
• A suspension from the Commons for a defined period
• A fine from the Electoral Commission

None of these automatically disqualify someone from becoming PM. There is no legal mechanism that bars an MP found to have breached the register of interests from leading a party or serving as PM.

As I now understand it, there's a legal gap where breaking parliamentary rules are not necessarily illegal, specifically that the legal obligation to declare only applies to sitting MPs, which Farage was not.

But he has form:

"
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage breached MPs' rules 17 times by failing to register financial interests totalling £384,000 within the 28-day limit, the parliamentary commissioner for standards has ruled.

Daniel Greenberg said that following an investigation, external he had concluded that the breaches were "inadvertent" and therefore would not be recommending any sanctions for the Clacton MP.

He added that Farage had apologised and had promised to meet the deadline in the future.

The interests that Farage failed to report on time include payments from GB News, Google, X and the Cameo app.
In his reply to the commissioner, Farage said he was "sincerely sorry" for the rule breaches adding that there had been "no malicious intent".

He also said he had been "extremely let down by a very senior member of staff".

During a meeting with the commissioner on 11 December 2025, Farage said he had been "a little bit shocked" by the "gross administrative error".

"You may say, why don't I enter those things myself. Well I don't do computers... so I rely on other people to do those things for me.

"I'm not, I'm afraid, computer literate, which makes me yet more an oddball than perhaps I was before."


That was a report from January of this year. Now, wouldn't you think that if all was above board with the £5m bung, he would have mentioned it at the stage he was being investigated for other stuff ? It has also gone very quiet regarding the Clacton property that his girlfriend "bought" despite her having no income. I wonder who approached who regarding the £5m.

"Hi Chris, Nigel here. I know I'm not an MP or ever will be again but can you give me £5m for my security that the government won't give me becasue I'm no longer involved in politics (according to Tice over the weekend)"

or

"Hi Nigel, Chris here. I'm really worried about your well being so how about me giving you £5m for nothing. I know you're not in politics any more so can't have impact on UK crypto legislation so let me just transfer it to you as a gift.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I could easily argue that the Greens economic plans are stupid and most economists agree but certain people will never agree that's true and ironically they're the same people who say that people who vote Farage are stupid.

The principle of truth however is exactly the same, it's just a different point of view. People are fully willing to overlook blatant stupidity as long as it's a stupidity that they agree with, that's the real problem.

This is the major appeal of centrism at the moment because it typically preaches to avoid abiding by extreme or 'stupid' views by taking a balanced view but look at what has happened. Centrism is dead in the ditch and everything is moving to the extremes at both ends of the left and right.

Start a new campaign slogan - Vote STUPID it's the way forward !

Should be plenty up for that apparently.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I’ve read that it could be deemed as criminal and the worst case could be a custodial sentence.

With regards to it being before he chose to run as an MP, I find that extremely hard to believe, he’s ran before and it was always on the cards. The £5m donation was a political donation and there’s nothing that will convince me the donor didn’t know he was going to run.

Agreed but it looks dodgy doesn't get you prosecuted, let alone convicted. The CPS would need proof that Farage intended to stand at the time the donation was made, or proof that the funds were used for campaigning, neither of which would be easy to prove without a whistleblower.

Anyway like I say, a big distraction this that belongs in another thread.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Especially if you want to see it that way !!

True but it's not how I want to see it. I merely relay what Perplexity AI said.

 

[We've got Guardiola]

Labour won a stonking FPTP majority in 2024 so under the fixed term parliament act they still have a mandate for three more years. I think they are getting the big decisions right irrespective of how big a twit you think Starmer is.

Less than 15% of the country voted for Labour in 2024. They won a majority in terms of FPTP but they didn't win anything in terms of votes, it's definitely not an ironclad mandate. They've now just lost a significant number of councils which just reflects where this is going to go.

Corbyn got 3m more votes in 2017 but he won 150 less seats. In 2024 Reform got nearly half as many votes as Labour and they got 5 seats versus Labour's 411, that's insane.

What I'm trying to say is I think Starmer and Labour could show their arses in Parliament or promise to make everybody a millionaire and the poll ratings still wouldn't really change now or ever. The amount of people who will vote for them was few and now it's likely to be even fewer and that's not a mandate.

 

[BigJoe#1]

Labour won a stonking FPTP majority in 2024 so under the fixed term parliament act they still have a mandate for three more years. I think they are getting the big decisions right irrespective of how big a twit you think Starmer is.

Labour did not win that election, the Conservatives lost it. The manner in which it was lost and it was won with the most tenuous majority (many many marginal seats) makes it what it is very fragile.

If Reform (or in fact anyone but Labour) wins the next election it will be again a case on the incumbents throwing away a huge majority and losing it.

People are becoming very intolerant of politics and politicians.

 

[Norbert D]

Exactly! The shit stirring media are bored shitless with him. Fucking policy wonk, with his boring serious detail and getting on with people and not full of gratuitous bile.
Give me a phoney man in the pub who calls a spade a spade whist trousering bungs and planning to shit all over the useful idiots who support him.

If Labour do force Starmer out for some opportunistic prick like Burnham then I am finished with them.

 

[Ban-jani]

There’s actually no precedent for resigning because of shitty local election results, Thatcher didn’t, May didn’t, even Blair had some at one point.

For me, he should have resigned over Mandelson, that was a disgrace.

 

[Chippy_boy]

As I do when people try to deny what is already out there - if you get my drift ?

There are any number of desperate posts on here already - no ?

In a thread about Starmer, supposedly discussing Starmer, yes, I'm seeing a lot of desperate posts. Agreed.

 

[Chippy_boy]

There’s actually no precedent for resigning because of shitty local election results, Thatcher didn’t, May didn’t, even Blair had some at one point.

For me, he should have resigned over Mandelson, that was a disgrace.

Funny how all the pundits said he was gone over that. Then they said they are only keeping him so he can own the local election debacle and then they can dump him. And now here we are and he's still here. He's been a dead man walking for about a year... And he's still here.