Election Year or Fear!

[SithHappens]

Tory MP Danny Kruger defects to Reform. Says he won't call a by-election. Both Farage and Lee Anderson have called for by-elections to be run in the past if an MP defects.

So they surely have to make him call one or reject his application to join Reform?

[ramAnag]

Tory MP Danny Kruger defects to Reform. Says he won't call a by-election. Both Farage and Lee Anderson have called for by-elections to be run in the past if an MP defects.

So they surely have to make him call one or reject his application to join Reform?

At the risk of agreeing with Farage and Anderson - first (and probably only time) for everything - it should surely be mandatory for any MP who defects to another party to have to seek immediate re-election on the grounds that he/she is no longer representing the majority who elected him.

[Andy_Faber]

At the risk of agreeing with Farage and Anderson - first (and probably only time) for everything - it should surely be mandatory for any MP who defects to another party to have to seek immediate re-election on the grounds that he/she is no longer representing the majority who elected him.

Depends if they are voting for the party or the person (eg Jeremy Corbyn,notable others)

[Geoff Parkstone]

At the risk of agreeing with Farage and Anderson - first (and probably only time) for everything - it should surely be mandatory for any MP who defects to another party to have to seek immediate re-election on the grounds that he/she is no longer representing the majority who elected him.

I agree that any MP who no longer represents the majority who elected them should call for a replacement election. Thus thedefector in this case sho have a rerun (which in the current environment they would likely win anyway). On the same basis Starmer should call for a new general election "on the grounds that he/she is no longer representing the majority who elected him/her."

The reference was indeed to the Unigate strawsuckers, well known makers off with the property of others

[ramAnag]

On the same basis Starmer should call for a new general election "on the grounds that he/she is no longer representing the majority who elected him/her."

I thought that might be your response. For the sake of context can we remember that Starmer has been in office for a little over 14 months.
Prior to that we had 14 YEARS of **** ups and failure to deal with the crisis that the Right now seek to make political capital from on a daily basis.
I don’t think he’s got everything right. I do think mistakes have been made, but c’mon, 14 months v 14 years and a self serving loon on the sidelines with no answers at all!

[Geoff Parkstone]

Two wrongs dont make a right.

I agree that the Tories were a stale, amoral and ineffective government for many of those 14 years, under May, that other woman who made Lady Jane Grey look enduring and Johnson in particular, but any hope of Starmer bringing fresh enthhusiasm and ideas to the role have long gone in my view.

His promises have been shattered in short order and the opinion polls (yes I know they are clearly far right wing orchestrated and so false,Obergruppenfuhrer Swale) say it all. I dont recall anyone who has lost the confidence of a country in such short order. He has lost all credibility and comes over as a weak leader. His appointment of Lammy as deputy merely is a protective move that demonstrates his own lack of self belief - a bit like Nixon appointing Ford as VP: "they wont impeach me if thats whats to follow"

[ramAnag]

Two wrongs dont make a right.

His appointment of Lammy as deputy merely is a protective move that demonstrates his own lack of self belief - a bit like Nixon appointing Ford as VP: "they wont impeach me if thats whats to follow"

Except that they did?and he did and I don?t think things quite work like that - not in the long term - as far as deputy PM?s are concerned.

As for being ?mates? with Trump. I?m sure Starmer finds it all enormously difficult, but surely his ability to maintain a cordial relationship with the mad man (imo) who happens to be the current leader of our closest and strongest allies is a plus point. We?re in the sh1t as it is. Imagine how much worse it would be if Trump was hitting us with the tariffs he?s using against others.

[swaledale]

Two wrongs dont make a right.

I agree that the Tories were a stale, amoral and ineffective government for many of those 14 years, under May, that other woman who made Lady Jane Grey look enduring and Johnson in particular, but any hope of Starmer bringing fresh enthhusiasm and ideas to the role have long gone in my view.

His promises have been shattered in short order and the opinion polls (yes I know they are clearly far right wing orchestrated and so false,Obergruppenfuhrer Swale) say it all. I dont recall anyone who has lost the confidence of a country in such short order. He has lost all credibility and comes over as a weak leader. His appointment of Lammy as deputy merely is a protective move that demonstrates his own lack of self belief - a bit like Nixon appointing Ford as VP: "they wont impeach me if thats whats to follow"

I don't disagree that on the perception front, Starmer has done badly, many being self inflicted mistakes or simply ill thought out policies that seem on the face of it to have been written on the back of a fag packet.

Leaving aside the obvious bias of the right wing media and the relentless atacks that have been as full of made up BS as they have been true, there is unfortunately a simplicity amongst the voting public, which fails or doesn't even try to understand, either the complexities of government (I'll accept that on the surface Starmer seems lacking in this aspect as well) or the sheer magnitude of the mess that Labour inherited.

One only has to think how Labour were unfairly and incorrectly blamed for the world financial crash, when in fact Gordon Brown's decisive action prevented it being worse than it was, yet the Tories have got away with, Brexit, not processing asylum seekers promptly, vastly increasing legal immigration, austerity, and so on and so forth.

So what have Labour done thats positive?

Brought down legal immigration, vastly reduced the use of hotels for asylum seekers, speeded up the processing of asylum claims, managed to deport more failed asylum seekers and people here working illegally, significantly reduced NHS waiting lists, started the nationalisation of the railways, ended the series of strikes that plagued the country, managed so far to reduce the negative effects of the mad orange Trump as far as possible, improved the relationship with the EU, negotiating both the start of a returns agreement for migrants and reduced checks on exports and imports. Increased the funds for building more council/social housing.

Whilst at the same time having to contend with a febrile political atmosphere whereby Farage the arch agitator and purveyor of simplistic, uncosted and unrealistic solutions to complex policies is managing to avoid scrutiny over his financing of a house in Clacton, his many jobs on the side and his frequent trips to the US, the last one where he was slagging off the UK like the great patriot he is!

I totally agree that Starmer needs to get a grip on both his comms, which is piss poor and articulate a vision, rather than sounding like some middle management wonk, but he hasn't totally failed to do what was promised, unless of course you believe the right wing media agitators based in Dubai, or France, Germany or Florida who almost seem to want the UK to end up in a civil war and spread half truths and damn lies to a gullible public on a daily basis.