Why might that be? You might like to ask that. I can’t possibly comment.
https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/zelostreet6
Tuesday, 12 May 2020
Starmer Broadcast Spooks Tories
After alleged Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson was gifted fifteen minutes prime time TV to waffle his way through what should have been a coherent statement on the road map to lift the lockdown, and thus carefully negotiate the minefield that is the Coronavirus pandemic, it was announced yesterday that Labour leader Keir Starmer would be allowed a response, in his role as Leader of the Opposition.
And so it came to pass: Starmer needed only a third of the time given to Bozo The Clown to make his points. and while he stressed that Labour will seek to support the Government during the pandemic, he very pointedly told viewers that, after it is over, there can be no going back to the previous business as usual. “We can’t go back” is his new mantra.
That instantly spooked ignorant right-wingers, those who have no understanding of the constitutional role of the Leader of the Opposition. The stupid was clearly strong with this one, as out they crawled, exemplified by Richard Northey (“active Conservative”) whining “Sir Keir Starmer’s response has morphed into a Labour Party political broadcast, rather than a statement on coronavirus. The BBC should be ashamed of themselves for airing this politicisation of a health crisis”. Any Tory elected representative like to follow up?
Staffordshire Moorlands councillor Joe Porter certainly would. “Absolutely ridiculous that the BBC allowed Keir Starmer to make a broadcast. This isn’t an election, there’s no reason for party political broadcasts. During the Second World War, Clement Attlee didn't give political broadcasts on the radio following Winston Churchill's speeches”.
False equivalence, much? So how about an equally clueless MP? Sure enough, one of the new intake was right there. Dehenna Davidson, now foisted on the unfortunate voters of Bishop Auckland, whinged “I see absolutely no reason for this to be broadcast at the expense of the taxpayer. This isn’t party political. Boris Johnson didn’t make a statement as Leader of the Conservative Party. He addressed the nation as our Prime Minister. BBC have big questions to answer on this”. Afraid they don’t. But there is more.
Christian Calgie, latest apprentice sandwich monitor to the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines at the Guido Fawkes blog, decided to join in. “Keir Starmer's role as LOTO is completely irrelevant in the BBC's decision to give him a party political broadcast this evening. The country's constitution has never dictated the BBC's broadcasting decisions, they have nothing to do with each other. An incomprehensible decision”. Bullshit.
Former political advisor Tom Hamilton was along with a smattering of reality. “Leader of the Opposition is an important constitutional role, political balance is an important function of a public broadcaster, and no government should be afraid of criticism and scrutiny” he told Ms Davidson, before adding “Also, exposing terrible political judgement by new MPs is a useful public service”. Will she get the hint? Doubtful. But her constituents might.
Anyone seeing the assemblage of Tory mardy strops might conclude that the Labour leader, with his support for front-line and other key workers, frightens them.
Why might that be? You might like to ask that. I can’t possibly comment.
Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by adding to its Just Giving page at
https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/zelostreet6
Why might that be? You might like to ask that. I can’t possibly comment.
https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/zelostreet6
It seemed to me as a Labour Party member that Sir Keir Starmer's broadcast was so much in the manner of a party political broadcast, rather than that of the leader of the official opposition that I turned off when he got to the bit about a new form of oppsition that will put the national interest first - implying that - the slogan for "the many not the few" and the official opposition led by Mr Corbyn did not put the national interest first.
ReplyDeleteDear Zelo ,
ReplyDeleteGreatly disappointed (not to say disillusioned) by the PLP and Labour Party secretariat , who’s conduct was devastatingly revealed by the anti-Semitism report , I feel that Sir Keir Starmer has a lot to prove . However his acceptance speech , but more his performance at PMQs on the Govt.’s complete ‘horlicks’ of moving to easing ‘lockdown’ is encouraging . As the architect of the ‘Second Referendum’ stance which poleaxed Labour N of the M25 he’s a lot to prove , but for all our sakes let’s hope he grows into the job ,
Derek
Ah. Many people north of the M25 were conned into thinking that leaving the EU is a brilliant move so, Labour has to support Brexit.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone agreeing to the statement above realise that the Leave EU campaign was for the benefit of the neo-liberals, the idle rich and for troughing Tory MPs hoping for directorships and fat cheques from USA companies?
How can an intelligent Labour Party Leader lend support to Britain quitting the EU and fucking up the nation?
People need to realise that Nigel Farage is not the new Messiah, he's a slimy, poncing con artist who makes Bozo Johnson seem slightly adequate.
"We can't go back" is one of Der Starmer's empty slogans. Not worth a carrot.
ReplyDeleteI might change my mind if he actually gets round to detailing badly needed radical policies.
Meanwhile, we have only his whiney face - which is already beginning to morph into a Bliar mask.
There are three things at work: one is the manufactured outrage about the Leader of the Opposition getting a chance to respond (Tories not wanting any kind of opposition). Second, it was a chance to kick the BBC (even though other channels carried the broadcast). Lastly, it's about Starmer himself: it was his first chance to 'introduce' himself to the public. In short, not only did he respond to Johnson, but it was also a chance to say: 'Hello, you don't know me, but I'm Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour party - and the key thing to know about me is that I'm nothing like Jeremy Corbyn.' In both respects, job done.
ReplyDeleteDear Zelo ,
ReplyDeleteA curiosity about the Brexit Referendum was the persistence of Remainers to diss the majority who voted Leave . For many of those voters the comment ‘How can an intelligent Labour Party Leader lend support to Britain quitting the EU and fucking up the nation?’ indicates that they have no understanding of the widely held view N of the M25 that the Nation was ‘fucked up ‘ much earlier from 1979 onwards , with the collusion of the New Labour Party . The many millions of Labour voters lost from this period onwards showed in the 2019 election that a return to that collusive era was not at all what they wanted . Sir Keir Starmer has a ‘mountain to climb’ not to appease Tories and Centrists but to convince N of the M25 that he understands that ‘no going back’ means most of all not to New Labour . After the downhill of Blair , Brown , Milliband and the assassination of Corbyn , how many times do they need whacking to ‘see the light ?’
Derek
@18:04
ReplyDeleteOh right. Vote Leave to teach Cameron a lesson.
Dear COAB ,
ReplyDeleteI voted Remain in the Brexit referendum and would have voted so again had the muddled Labour message of 2019 brought about a Labour Govt. However the Labour secretariat’s and PLP’s machinations presented such a familiar picture of New Labour treachery , that it reminded too many people of the long year’s of neo Liberal collusion . The Tories are selfish bast***ds , however New Labour weren’t much better , but also hypocrites . It wasn’t a good look . From now on if it’s New Labour revived , it will suffer the fate of the German SPD , who are down to 8% electoral support . Labour could easily drop from their 2019 32% ,
Derek
Your analogy might make sense if Germany had a First Past The Post election system and the AfD held the most seats.
ReplyDeleteThe SPD losing a little bit of support in a CDU/CSU/SPD coalition doesn't make much difference.
As for people voting for the Tories because 'Labour aren't much better', I say C and B On A Tandem.
Dear BOAB ,
ReplyDeleteAre U saying that because of the German use of a proportional representation system that the actual split between the parties is not relevant ? Obviously that’s wrong because it is relevant in determining the main character of an administration , especially of a coalition . The German SPD for many years alternated majority governments with the CDU/CSU right-wingers , their vote share was 30-45% https://www.statista.com/statistics/1037985/cdu-and-spd-vote-share-by-election/ . In following ‘New Labour’ centrist consensus politics since 2009 in a CDU/CSU/SPD coalition they have now found themselves with less seats than the Afd . Centrist politics for Left Wing parties mean oblivion , PR or FPTP it matters not . Dropping the ‘brand’ image for Left Wing parties has seen off most social democratic parties in PR Europe , and where followed beckons the same fate for FPTP UK and whatever you call the US system ,
Derek
@12:05
ReplyDeleteAh. The beauty of having far left-wing policies and failing to win elections is being able to produce policy after policy with no fear of having to apply them in real life.
The rise in support for extreme right-wing Parties will not be halted by left-of-centre Parties moving further towards full Marxist principles.
Dear Derek,
ReplyDeleteMany people in Britain think that Angela Merkel is leftwing and that she leads the German equivalent of the Labour Party.