[The Weeping Angel]

Normal reaction here from the Telegraph

[Bones McCoy]

No similar reaction to Thatcher / Davidson / Truss.

Charles Moore, get in the fucking sea.

[Youngian]

"We know you who you are, Clark: you are a company man for the Tory party, not a journalist. Stop trying to pretend you know one end of an A5 notebook from another,"

[Andy McDandy]

Ross Clark, who looks and writes like a rejected League of Gentlemen character.

[Bones McCoy]

Normal reaction here from the Telegraph

Yep, cosplaying politicians are bad

[Andy McDandy]

Well done Jenkinson for cosplaying every bad guy from Red Riding, The Shield, Line of Duty and Training Day in one go.

[soulboy]

I'm getting serious Neil Razor Ruddock at Swindon Town* vibes.

*one of those hard man of football types, m'lud, who was carrying so much timber that his new club couldn't find a pair of shorts to fit him.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Thanks, Jon Cruddas. Though greater thanks to the Guardian for elevating this to stop story.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... on-cruddas

Cruddas, MP for Dagenham and Rainham and a former party policy chief, writes that “apart from his actual name, little ties Starmer to the ethical and spiritual concerns of Labour’s early founders, figures such as Keir Hardie and George Lansbury”.


He continues: “His approach to economics does not appear to be grounded in any specific theoretical understanding of inequality, material justice and welfare distribution. Despite a successful career as a human rights lawyer, as Labour leader Starmer appears disinterested [sic] in questions of liberty and freedom.”

Rather embarrassing [sic] there.

I'm not really sure why he expects the actual leader to start spouting political theory in public. Did Jim Callaghan do that?

Cruddas concludes by warning that without more connections to the party’s traditions and values, and a clearer offer to the electorate, an election win could bring real dangers and even existential risk.

I reckon a manifesto will be published at some point.

[Abernathy]

Well done Jenkinson for cosplaying every bad guy from Red Riding, The Shield, Line of Duty and Training Day in one go.

As well as the late Cyril Smith, too.

[Abernathy]

I'm not really sure why he expects the actual leader to start spouting political theory in public. Did Jim Callaghan do that?

More pertinently, did the blessed Jezza ever do it ?

[Tubby Isaacs]

Cruddas isn't a Jez fan, Not sure what his idea of a leader would be.

I suppose Starmer has done lecture-type speeches in the past, so maybe Cruddas has looked at those and found them wanting. From my point of view, the fewer of those speeches the better. I mean, how does politics work? Do you knock up, say, a childcare policy and then chuck it away because it doesn't gel with what George Lansbury said in 1930? Should students of George Lansbury be put in charge of rail investment?

[Andy McDandy]

In Casino Royale, Ian Fleming said that the Conservative Party of the 1950s would look pretty damn socialist to a Tory from the 1920s. Times and circumstances change.

And yes, let's try to second guess a bunch of long dead people. Because that works really well for the US supreme court.

[The Weeping Angel]

Thanks, Jon Cruddas. Though greater thanks to the Guardian for elevating this to stop story.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... on-cruddas

Cruddas, MP for Dagenham and Rainham and a former party policy chief, writes that “apart from his actual name, little ties Starmer to the ethical and spiritual concerns of Labour’s early founders, figures such as Keir Hardie and George Lansbury”.


He continues: “His approach to economics does not appear to be grounded in any specific theoretical understanding of inequality, material justice and welfare distribution. Despite a successful career as a human rights lawyer, as Labour leader Starmer appears disinterested [sic] in questions of liberty and freedom.”

Rather embarrassing [sic] there.

I'm not really sure why he expects the actual leader to start spouting political theory in public. Did Jim Callaghan do that?

Cruddas concludes by warning that without more connections to the party’s traditions and values, and a clearer offer to the electorate, an election win could bring real dangers and even existential risk.

I reckon a manifesto will be published at some point.

On another forum someone said he's the leader of the Labour Party our best chance of ousting the Tories and he should be persuading voters to vote for his party.

[Abernathy]

On another forum someone said he's the leader of the Labour Party our best chance of ousting the Tories and he should be persuading voters to vote for his party.

Starmer literally does nothing else.

[The Weeping Angel]

On another forum someone said he's the leader of the Labour Party our best chance of ousting the Tories and he should be persuading voters to vote for his party.

Starmer literally does nothing else.

I made that very point.

[slilley]

We are a good few weeks away from a General Election, even if Sunak does opt for one in May. No opposition party is going to lay out in detail its full programme now because the governing party will cherry pick the best bits and bad mouth the rest. Better to speak in broad themes and aspirations for now and in the background do the work on the detail so that when April comes and we are starting an election campaign you hit the ground running.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I wouldn't even say that themes are that important to most voters. We've heard for ages about the need for Starmer to lay these out, but he's not done so and remains miles ahead. Things can change, but so far it seems like concentrating on showing up the government has been quite sufficient. Anyway, one man's theme is another man's tax bombshell waiting to fall on them, Themes can wait for the couple of months before the election.

[davidjay]

He can see the end of the corridor in sight; he'd be stupid to start juggling the vase now.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Heavyweight jurist, Alex Nunns, weighs in.

Starmer's already said payments should start immediately and the Post Office should lose its prosecution powers. What does Alex want? The PM to personally cancel convictions en masse? That's not normally what PMs do. These are unusual circumstances, sure, but we can doubtless afford to spend a while getting the process right.

By the way, the bloke in the clip doesn't actually say what should happen there- I'm sure he went on to. But the point is that he criticised Starmer for not being "radical". So Alex whacks the clip right up.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Here by the way is Prof Hodges' position.

The reasons for this, Prof Hodges added, included an unwillingness of people to appeal due to a "deep distrust of authority", evidence being lost or destroyed, and issues with compensation if a Post Office manager is not granted a retrial.

"The convictions are unsafe not only because they relied on the Horizon computer evidence, but also because of egregious systemic Post Office behaviour in interviews and pursuing prosecutions," he said.

"This led to guilty pleas and false confessions, driven by legal advice to victims to minimise sentences, and by the psychological pressure of dealing with an institution systematically disregarding the truth and fairness."

You can still appeal after pleading guilty (though I appreciate that normally this would be taken as a bad sign.

There would seem to be some middle ground between universal pardons by the executive, and the current process which everyone (including Sir Keir) seems to agree isn't working.