McCluskey really wants to ensure Labour will never be electable !

Those who know Starmer say that playing the long game is a key part of his personality. I like the subtlety but whether it will be successful who knows. The polling at the moment seems to indicate it will be but we have a very long way to go. I also think in a crisis situation such as this you have to play things very carefully.

nightowl aren't union members serving their own interests? they would be remarkably altruistic if they thought only of others and never of themselves. perhaps that is what all the union members in the rust belt were thinking when they voted conservative.

Trisha is more articulate than I am and expresses many views that I agree with.
This is a very interesting thread though, with thought out and reasoned responses, in the main, which are making me think.
I hope very much to be able to vote for Labour at the next election, but would like more opposition to Conservative policies which want to retain the inequalities in our society, and which are wasting millions of taxpayers money on contracts for their friends.
I hope that those of you who think Keir Starmer is biding his time will be proved right.

Havn't the Government just banned any criticism of capitalism in schools.

Oops 14.09

trisher I find myself totally agreeing with your post of 2.09.

(I am a Conservative)

I want to say that many of the points made are all referring to the past.
we won't be the same people or country when Covid has finished with us.
Nor will much of the world be the same.

Starmer does seem to be a decent person with a moral compass....and that in itself is rare these days. So far I like him and would vote for him.

You cannot expect the country to ever vote for a Lab Party that is banging on about a return to socialist values because the young have no idea what that means!
I doubt it is taught in schools.

We need new more progressive thinking, probably get rid of the FPTP and be more like our European neighbours.
If the Tories keep being returned to power there will nothing left of this country at all.

Ilovecheese Fight yer for it! Or maybe there are 2 of us???

If someone can post on here the LP policies which Starmer agrees with and the ones he doesn't support I would be grateful. Unfortunately having spent years as a QC I fear the man will never commit to anything, but will try to walk the middle road, being all things to all people and will suffer the fate that Nye Bevan warned about.

I disagree Trisher- I think Starmer is playing a very clever game against Johnson- and will win. But then be scuppered by his own party (mine too btw). And with respect, and I mean that- no animosity against you at all- as said, I hear you.

The problem is that those who voted for Johnson (and yes I do know some) are now seeing him as inadequate and yet too restrictive. They look at Starmer and see a "yes"man. The very scary thing being that they do not espouse the centre views that many believe are electable but are moving rapidly to the right. With no credible outspoken opposition I fear for what will happen in the next 4 years.It isn't enough to just allow Johnson to make mistakes and do things badly. This government will take defeat in every PMQs and let Johnson wallow in his ineffectiveness, whilst people like Pritti Patel take the temperature of the public and try to work out just how far they can go in introducing restrictions and curbing freedoms, and Cummings pulls strings behind the scenes. Unfortunately Starmer doesn't seem able to combat this (or is unwilling to).

As said before, I actually hear what you are saying Trisher- and I understand it, even though I do not entirely subscribe to it- but I hear you and agree to much you say.

But what then ... as Gill says, cold comfort when a party spends years in wilderness- watching, not Starmer going a long way (even if you think it is not far enough- and yes, I get it) ...doing his best to get the best conditions for the majority- but ERG and Cummings (not Johnson, but probably worse)- selling the country to the USA and all who are prepared to fill their coffers.

Surely, even if any of us agree with what you say - is that truly the best of the two alternatives. Because the one you dream of (and again, I can see why) - is just not going to happen- I am sorry to say. THAT is the reality.

Principles are important of course, but they are cold comfort when a party spends years in the political wilderness. I think Starmer is playing a clever game with Johnson; agreeing with much of the covid19 safety measures, but being persistent in his questioning, not losing his temper and thus making Johnson look like the blustering liar he is. I also agree that he is right in not putting forward what Labour would do, this will merely deflect from what the Tories are doing badly and give the Tory supporting press fodder for their front pages. I would however, like him to tackle Johnson and/or Hancock about the absolute clusterf**k of Track and Trace run by their buddy Dido Harding.

I thought I was the "one person"

I would just be happy to see a credible opposition

And look at the number of elections Blair won and Corbyn lost

I take it I am the "one person" interesting isn't it that I'm not named. Actually I don't want to "scupper" the LP I want to see an LP which is true to it's socialist ideals, that proposes real change, and will return to centre politics, the left wing views that the country I grew up in believed in. It isn't my fault if GN posters have done what a lot of people do in later years and moved to the right. There are younger people who think as I do. And the people I know who are Unite members are behind McCluskey. They don't want to fund Tory lite policies. If you don't realise how disenfranchised people feel when there are two very similar parties involved in an election look at how the numbers of people voting dropped after Tony Blair and rose when Corbyn was leader.

Not re-read the whole thread again- but I do believe this is correct - 1 person on Gransnet thinks McCluskey is right - and would rather scupper the LP and the country with it. Right.

Alan Johnson, Gordon Brown, Jack Straw, David Blunkett ,
Tory light , really ?

The unions are their members Monica, private donors serve their own interests. Whether or not you (not you personally) like or approve of McCluskey personally, unions continue to be the means for working people to protect their basic employment and economic interests in the broader labour movement and remain inextricably linked to the party they gave birth to.

Tony Blair was the best thing that happened to the Labour party, but then it all went wrong for him ie. the Iraq war/weapons of mass destruction etc. However, I think Starmer is more like Blair and therefore more electable. Jeremy Corbyn was a man of principle and I respected him, but he just didn't appeal to the electorate in the same way that Michael Foot didn't either. I think we have a chance with Starmer but he needs to stand up to Johnson more. At present he seems to be still finding his feet.

I've seen many people posting on political sites who say they have left Unite because of they don't want McClusky , he doesn't speak for them. The unions are no longer closed shops. Many younger workers don't see the point of joining (sadly). The LP is going to have to find other sponsors. Many of the celebrities who speak against government policies could easily contribute mega bucks, put their money where their social consciousness appear to be

A bit disingenuous Ilovecheese. The unions have been the back bone of Labour finance since the party was formed. This is not a small donor saying 'I will no longer give you £10,000 a a year', it is a union that has funded the party for decades, if not longer, saying that it is going to start reducing funding. If the movement as a whole started to do this, what should the Labour movement do? Change it's policies to ones the unions like in order to get the money back, as I said, this kind of behaviour draws outrage when it is the Conservative prty and major donors.

It seems to me that sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. You cannot have it both ways.

Nobody has said that Tony Blair was a failure. Maybe a Tory lite party is what the electorate want. That will be decided at the next election. But that doesn't mean that people who don't agree have got to pay towards such a party.
Keir Starmer is asking big donors to think about giving to Labour again, they may make up the shortfall from the unions and the reduction in the membership subs

'We won't be fooled again' - but that is the WHOLE point - you will if the party is so divided that it is unelectable.