Mandelson failed security vetting. Starmer says he didn’t know

I think now that the Labour Party definitely needs a new leader because things have just gone too far. If they change leadership it just might save them. They have a long and proud history and it would be tragic if they go under. The current leader just doesn’t cut it and never has. He is not a safe pair of hands, quite the reverse. Just hope someone steps up and rebuilds the confidence they deserve.

You can blame the headlines in the right-wing newspapers all you like, but Starmer is the author of his own misfortune: simply a painful lack of ability. Over-promoted during his legal career, seen as an escape from Jeremy Corbyn with help from Petey, he is now a laughing stock, (see Have I Got News etc). Very hard to come back after that, compounded by his disastrous performance in the House last week.

eazybee

You can blame the headlines in the right-wing newspapers all you like, but Starmer is the author of his own misfortune: simply a painful lack of ability. Over-promoted during his legal career, seen as an escape from Jeremy Corbyn with help from Petey, he is now a laughing stock, (see Have I Got News etc). Very hard to come back after that, compounded by his disastrous performance in the House last week.

That's not directly related to his not knowing about Mandelson's security vetting. What's happening is that many of those people who have a negative opinion of Starmer are picking on this as another stick to beat him.

Yes, I do know what the headlines have been writing about him from the day Labour won the election.

nanna8

I think now that the Labour Party definitely needs a new leader because things have just gone too far. If they change leadership it just might save them. They have a long and proud history and it would be tragic if they go under. The current leader just doesn’t cut it and never has. He is not a safe pair of hands, quite the reverse. Just hope someone steps up and rebuilds the confidence they deserve.

Why have things gone too far?

twaddle

nanna8

I think now that the Labour Party definitely needs a new leader because things have just gone too far. If they change leadership it just might save them. They have a long and proud history and it would be tragic if they go under. The current leader just doesn’t cut it and never has. He is not a safe pair of hands, quite the reverse. Just hope someone steps up and rebuilds the confidence they deserve.

Why have things gone too far?

nanna8.How long would it take a new leader to establish the sort of relationship that Starmer has with other world leaders? What exactly do you want the new leader to do that Starmer isn’t? Who do you want to replace him??? Didn’t you want us to have a leader like Trump at one time ( apologies if my memory is incorrect…)

Conservative PM Cameron resigned, and paved the way for Teresa May- 2016-2019, not elected by the public. She was internally deposed, followed by Boris Johnston, 2019 to 2022. He was deposed followed by Teresa May ( not elected by the public and lasted 5 weeks) the Rishi Sunak ( not elected by the public and he called an early election) 2022-2024.

That wreaked havoc on the Conservative Party, the public's trust and they lost the 2024 General Election with one of the lowest, if not the lowest Conservative vote share in history. Clearly such PM changes are not good for the country and not liked by the general public.

There can be little doubt that Starmer made a mistake (in hindsight/bad judgement call) appointing Peter M, for which he has apologised. It has not be proved he lied or mis led Parliament, to my knowledge. Starmer deciding to sack Olly Robbins for his failing/mistakes, as perceived by Starmer that is, was the wrong call. Also it does not sit well that Starmer believes he should "fight on" and he gives mixed messages over his perceptions about accountability. That is why was Olly Robbins sacked for his perceived mistakes/failings- but not Starmer himself?

Having said all that, the amount of time and media coverage devoted to this sad state of affairs, in context of cost of living crisis, geopolitical world events and wars and consequent impact on the price of oil and diplomatic relationships- seems somewhat disproportionate.

Further, Peter M's appointment did not cost the public £billions( eg as in the Conservative Government's PPE "VIP' lane fiasco, Liz Truss's market havoc that added £100s pounds per month to many paying their mortgages, Referendum that lead to Brexit decision and its consequent high adverse outcomes such that well over half the population feel we should never have voted to leave). Peter M's appointment did not lead to any controversy, problems, adverse diplomatic relationship outcomes when he was in post during his term as US Ambassador. Any recent US/UK relationship decline, after PM was sacked- has been wreaked by Trump, not Peter M and not only on the UK.

Boris followed by Lix Truss- sorry

One of few good decisions made by the Conservative Party ( imo) in recent years was to give Cameron the position of foreign Secretary because of his experience which I am sure was why they took the risk with Mandelson as ambassador.

This latest debacle from Starmer isn’t the first or only thing he’s got wrong it’s (along with no doubt dismal election results) the straw that will break the camels back.
He’s a weak leader with poor judgement.

twaddle

eazybee

You can blame the headlines in the right-wing newspapers all you like, but Starmer is the author of his own misfortune: simply a painful lack of ability. Over-promoted during his legal career, seen as an escape from Jeremy Corbyn with help from Petey, he is now a laughing stock, (see Have I Got News etc). Very hard to come back after that, compounded by his disastrous performance in the House last week.

That's not directly related to his not knowing about Mandelson's security vetting. What's happening is that many of those people who have a negative opinion of Starmer are picking on this as another stick to beat him.

Yes, I do know what the headlines have been writing about him from the day Labour won the election.

And people did exactly the same with Boris, best PM we have had for a long time.

All Prime Minsters have their fans and their detractors- some more than others. List Truss arguably the most disliked in modern times, including by her own Party. All PMs get things wrong- and even more so in the eyes of their detractors.

Is Boris Johnson the best PM we have had for a long time? Obviously his fans will think so. According to an Ipsos poll, a substantial portion of the British public viewed his tenure negatively, with many ranking it among the worst in recent history. However, his fans/supporters continue to praise his charisma and ability to change UK politics.

Meandrogrog

twaddle

eazybee

You can blame the headlines in the right-wing newspapers all you like, but Starmer is the author of his own misfortune: simply a painful lack of ability. Over-promoted during his legal career, seen as an escape from Jeremy Corbyn with help from Petey, he is now a laughing stock, (see Have I Got News etc). Very hard to come back after that, compounded by his disastrous performance in the House last week.

That's not directly related to his not knowing about Mandelson's security vetting. What's happening is that many of those people who have a negative opinion of Starmer are picking on this as another stick to beat him.

Yes, I do know what the headlines have been writing about him from the day Labour won the election.

And people did exactly the same with Boris, best PM we have had for a long time.

Even after being photographed drunk and hung over after partying with Lebedev ( who he gave a knighthood to?) and that was even before he became PM? Has Keir Starmer ever done anything like that?

AI Overview: ( Starmer hasn't finished his tenure yet so doesn't feature)

Top UK Prime Ministers (Popularity Ranking 2024)

Key Historical Rankings (Up to 2024)
Long-term historical analyses, including academic surveys of postwar leaders, typically emphasise effectiveness and impact:
Top Performers: Winston Churchill (war leadership), Clement Attlee (creation of the welfare state/NHS), and Margaret Thatcher (economic reform).
High-Ranking Moderners: Tony Blair is often rated highly for electoral success and modernisation.

21st Century Prime Ministers (Ranked by Stability/Performance) By early 2024, the UK experienced significant turnover, leading to these general, lower-end rankings for recent leaders regarding stability:

1)Tony Blair (1997–2007) - Long tenure, major reforms.
2) Gordon Brown (2007–2010) - Viewed better over time.
3) David Cameron (2010–2016)
4) Theresa May (2016–2019)
5) Boris Johnson (2019–2022) - Highly popular within his party, polarising nationally.
6) Rishi Sunak (2022–2024) - Faced low public satisfaction scores.
7) Liz Truss (2022) - Shortest tenure, lowest ranking.

Thanks LemonJam. Starmer always admitted he isn’t a politician and rather than being an advantage it’s back fired.
I still see him as a man of honour but acknowledge mistakes that rest at his door.

Anyone who sees Johnson as the best PM we e had in ages is simply Very Wrong

Personally, I'd be amazed if Starmer is allowed to hang on until the next general election (unless something very unexpected happens). However, that will be up to the Labour Party itself. I'm not a member and I don't follow it that closely, so I don't know exactly how the process works. My impression is that there is a lot of division. The party would be foolish to topple Starmer until there's a clear leader waiting in the sidelines - and I don't think there is yet.

The Labour Party's parliamentary majority is so huge that it (and Starmer) could hang for a while, even if the local elections are a disaster. If, as predicted, Reform take a number of councils, the chances are they'll make a pig's ear of them, as they have with the councils they already hold. People might begin to think twice about voting for them again and certainly begin to wonder if they could really run the country when they can't run local councils. It's anybody's guess where their votes would go, if they didn't vote for Reform, but Labour could benefit.

Just so twaddle. I can’t see any candidate who could replace Starmer currently.
I wish Andy Burnham had stood in Gorton and Denton, he’d be an asset in Westminster and a string candidate in any leadership contest.
Maybe a seat will be fiubd for him

twaddle

Personally, I'd be amazed if Starmer is allowed to hang on until the next general election (unless something very unexpected happens). However, that will be up to the Labour Party itself. I'm not a member and I don't follow it that closely, so I don't know exactly how the process works. My impression is that there is a lot of division. The party would be foolish to topple Starmer until there's a clear leader waiting in the sidelines - and I don't think there is yet.

The Labour Party's parliamentary majority is so huge that it (and Starmer) could hang for a while, even if the local elections are a disaster. If, as predicted, Reform take a number of councils, the chances are they'll make a pig's ear of them, as they have with the councils they already hold. People might begin to think twice about voting for them again and certainly begin to wonder if they could really run the country when they can't run local councils. It's anybody's guess where their votes would go, if they didn't vote for Reform, but Labour could benefit.

Twaddle you are well named!
You say Starmer is 'hanging on' without any evidence that's the case.
'You then admit to not being a party member, well I am and can say there is not an inkling of a leadership election except in the media. It is pure fabrication.
I do agree with you final comments though, which sort of contradict what you wrote first, that Labour are in power for some time and won't be going anywhere, even if Reform do manage to scrape some councils.
Either way it is a win for Labour in that they either do well in the local elections, or Reforrm do and then collapse because their political ideology doesn't bear scrutiny, even if there is one, which I don't believe there is.

The Labour Party needs to rethink its political ideology if it wants another term in office. There’s no appeal to the aspirational middle classes atm and I guess it’s this group who turn out to vote?

Well that shows the difference in views! I think the laboyr party is now the party of the middle class.

Labour Party is toast.

keepingquiet, I don't know what you're going on about. I didn't suggest that there's a leadership election.

I think Labour will do better than expected in the local elections, partly because of all the adverse publicity which will prompt disillusioned labour to vote , because the alternative (for them) is so much worse. Keir Starmer should go but nothing at present dents his carapace of arrogance, and he simply does not care about Britain.

Oh I have just seen who is 'favourite' to replace Starmer amongst members, Ed milliband, I could weep.

LemonJam

All Prime Minsters have their fans and their detractors- some more than others. List Truss arguably the most disliked in modern times, including by her own Party. All PMs get things wrong- and even more so in the eyes of their detractors.

Is Boris Johnson the best PM we have had for a long time? Obviously his fans will think so. According to an Ipsos poll, a substantial portion of the British public viewed his tenure negatively, with many ranking it among the worst in recent history. However, his fans/supporters continue to praise his charisma and ability to change UK politics.

He certainly had charisma in spades but more importantly he got the UK out of the EU.

Galaxy

Oh I have just seen who is 'favourite' to replace Starmer amongst members, Ed milliband, I could weep.

Oh unprintable words

Please 🙅‍♀️ no!