He has done it! The toolmakers son has resigned!

Sunshinegirls

I've lost count at how many times Starmer said his father was a toolmaker he was proud of the fact.

So what?

Now being proud of one’s parents achievements is a bad thing?

We all know why he did this! He was accused on more than one occasion of being elitist. Like his father, Starmer accumulated wealth by sheer hard work and talent.

Unlike so many politicians and their old boy Eton backgrounds and parents with inherited wealth.

Samwam

morningstaronline.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-going-he-has-done-lasting-harm-left-and-whole-country?fbclid=IwdGRjcASnJBtjbGNrBKciEWV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHvioWUba7Rjx10BnGqQ8b0PbNVogmSlcX4Ctsz-KhZR8h-qn0GKUlMLSpQRv_aem_ELPbLJJAtlTPvEVvlL8VUQ

KEIR STARMER’S resignation as Prime Minister attracts all the usual plaudits to his decency, integrity and commitment to serve. He merits none of them.

Piece from The Morning Star newspaper. I agree with this summation of Starmer.

You might well agree, many won’t.

TakeThat7

Feel sorry for him but giving someone like Mandelson such a big job showed a lack of good judgement and accepting freebies when you are so well off. that's not a decison that shows good judgement He didn't come across as someone who understood the working class

Simply cannot agree with you, but each to their own.

He is far better placed to understand “working class” as both his parents were true socialists and “worked”.

Keir didn’t grow up in an elitist environment even though he chose, through hard work, to enter an elitist environment, where almost everyone else would have had far wealthier parents and elitist schooling than he.

morningstaronline.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-going-he-has-done-lasting-harm-left-and-whole-country?fbclid=IwdGRjcASnJBtjbGNrBKciEWV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHvioWUba7Rjx10BnGqQ8b0PbNVogmSlcX4Ctsz-KhZR8h-qn0GKUlMLSpQRv_aem_ELPbLJJAtlTPvEVvlL8VUQ


KEIR STARMER’S resignation as Prime Minister attracts all the usual plaudits to his decency, integrity and commitment to serve. He merits none of them.

Piece from The Morning Star newspaper. I agree with this summation of Starmer.

It’s sad Starmer has been made to stand down. The UK treated him like a contestant in a game show.
He was miles better than an other Prime Minster the UK has had in the last ten years but all he got was ridicule because he didn’t have charisma and let down by advisers he thought he could trust.

As The NY Times has put it ‘Charisma alone can’t fix Britain’.

People don’t want to, cut their coat according to their cloth. I don’t mean the real poor, they need help, especially those who are working and have children.

What can Burnham do except give out more money and get the UK into more debt? Now there will be a man (no women?) in power who has not been voted in by the public with no clear manifesto.

I misread that answer.

I assumed the response 'Boris' was about naming a PM with a litany of ERRORS

I've lost count at how many times Starmer said his father was a toolmaker he was proud of the fact.

Margaret Thatcher was called the grocers daughter from Grantham 🤷‍♀️

Well, when Mr Johnson left office, after being found guilty of lying to Parliament, I don't recall seeing a thread declaring that "The wife beater's son has resigned".
Perhaps it was because Mr Johnson senior did say " It was just the once" as his wife left hospital.
Perhaps we should reflect on the Prime Minister, rather than his or her antecedents.

Meandrogrog

Casdon

The challenge to you Meandrogrog is to come up with a list for a PM under whose watch there are no issues on which they were deemed to have failed on leaving office by their critics. I’m looking forward to hearing about this paragon.

Is there a PM who has left such a dismal record? It takes some beating.

In answer to your ‘challenge’ its Boris.

I choked on my coffee.
A very quick search on Johnson:

The primary failures and controversies of his premiership include:

Partygate Scandal: Johnson and other officials were fined by police for attending social gatherings at Downing Street during strict national lockdowns, permanently damaging public trust.

Chris Pincher Scandal: Johnson promoted MP Chris Pincher to a government whip despite being aware of past sexual misconduct allegations. The handling of this information triggered mass resignations across his cabinet and ultimately led to his downfall.

Covid-19 Response: Critics condemned delayed lockdowns, the handling of care home policies, and the inefficient Test and Trace system, which cost billions but was found to have made minimal measurable impact during the pandemic.

Brexit Trade Deal: The EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement introduced complex regulatory barriers and customs checks that created significant friction for British businesses trading with Europe.Standards and Sleaze: His administration faced heavy criticism for attempting to overhaul parliamentary standards to protect a Conservative MP and for a secretive, luxury refurbishment of his Downing Street flat.

The Northern Ireland Protocol: The post-Brexit trading arrangements for Northern Ireland, initially negotiated by Johnson, led to deep political instability and trade disruption, which later required extensive renegotiation by successive governments.

How on earth is the list published by the Mail helping anybody?
It's time we stopped wasting time and energy on this nonsense.

Casdon

The challenge to you Meandrogrog is to come up with a list for a PM under whose watch there are no issues on which they were deemed to have failed on leaving office by their critics. I’m looking forward to hearing about this paragon.

Is there a PM who has left such a dismal record? It takes some beating.

In answer to your ‘challenge’ its Boris.

The challenge to you Meandrogrog is to come up with a list for a PM under whose watch there are no issues on which they were deemed to have failed on leaving office by their critics. I’m looking forward to hearing about this paragon.

Primrose53

LemonJam

Starmer is/was a consummate professional lawyer who rose to his DPS leadership role based on his legal career success and many years experience as a defence lawyer. Thus he had/has a cool, forensic, unemotional, evidence based decision making style. He believes in the rule of law and brought that to the table as PM. Thats is mainly what he brought. This helped shaped his success on the world stage but rendered him less equipped his to connect with his cabinet, MPs, party members, electorate, trade union affiliates and the media. Lack of. engagement with those partners made everything far more difficult and challenging and eventually led to his downfall.

His determination helped shaped the LP back to a position sufficiently fit for purpose to win the GE in 2024. Credit where credit is due. That same determination in removing the whip from MPs, who did not serve his cool calculated decisions at various times was alienating to some and thus he was never an alliance building leader.

Starmer came very late to politics, in his 50s, thus had few years to hone his political skills, lacked political experience, had little time develop the requisite skills to communicate with his electorate (his style was never engaging) lacked political experience to determine the best candidates to form a government (he chose RR as chancellor fgs), to engage with the civil service and treasury etc. He was. thus much more reliant than the majority of PMs on his advisors. His advisors were not chosen well and did not serve him well.

Starmer made decisions in his style of a rules based lawyer. rather than with the ability to understand the impact politically. He made some early decisions that backfired in context of his political naivety and lack of political nous. Politics is a febrile, unforgiving environment he was quickly on the back foot.

Thus the expectation that he would be a 'safe pair of hands' domestically quickly began to unscramble in the face of early mishaps. The electorate and media was quick to judge.

It can't be taken away from Starmer that he is a conscientious, ethical man that came to his role to serve. He, in leading his government achieved some successes as others have ably listed in earlier posts. He has served the UK well on the world stage as other posters have outlined. In febrile, geo political challenges and risks that is to his credit.

Yet some poor decisions, either ill thought through or not communicated well, out weighed the positives for many, too many. This disconnect gained momentum. His U turns frustrated many. The electorate, trade union affiliate supporters began to pull against him as a leader. His decision to appoint Mandelson increased the pull against him further. His decision, as part of NEC, to not allow AB to sand as an MP in G and D by election was politically naive as that increased the determination of AB. The recent local by elections and vote share capture of Reform UK was the last straw for detractors. and Starmer thus was now seen as vulnerable.

The need for change became inevitable to so many. Not every. one of course- but a large majority. AB's election in Makerfield presented the detractors with an apparent solution to facilitate the change in leadership so many seek. Starmer has applied his lawyer forensic consideration of this evidence over the weekend and the penny dropped. He is a honourable man and has decided to step down as a result. His speech this morning I felt was dignified and offered with good grace- to Strmer's credit.

AB will put himself forward as a contender. Streeting now will not (did he actually manage to secure 81% MP backers in the first place? No matter now- he can read the room!). Not many other contenders will mange to secure 81 MPs backers in a leadership contest vote, particularly now as so many will sway towards AB. It will not be a bloody contest, or drawn out - we thank Starmer for that.

That it is not immediate (thanks again Starmer) gives AB time to get on top of his brief- put ideas together- etc. Love him or loathe him there is no need for a GE (Farage is just chancing his arm and trying to get media headlines as he fully understands this fact) and there will not be a GE. We will have a new LP PM in post after the summer recess, poised and ready for a very very short honeymoon phase. The conference season will quickly follow. That presents opportunities (and challenges) for the new PM to hone and communicate priorities and direction of travel for and to the LP and the electorate for the next three years.

I suspect that will be AB. He is politically savvy and experienced. He is not perfect, no one is. But he has been round the block, is consummate in communicating to his electorate and the media in Grter Manchester and no reason to think he can not transfer his skills. He will not be unduly set back by lack of positive media support, will stand his ground, and will do as he has done for the past 9 years- build alliances and partnerships. Like Stramer- AB is similarly determined, ambitious and takes his political opportunities as they present. Unlike Starmer he will engage much better. he will not expect an easy ride- he can read the room. He is not divisive in approach.

Then the hard work begins. The new PM's MPs and cabinet must fully understand there are three years only to knuckle down and do the work. No further chances to change course. The electorate would not stand for that....

You can list as many great things that you think Starmer has achieved but if he is that great how come he was so unpopular that even his own party wanted him out?

The Daily Mail has written an article looking into Starmer’s claims of his achievements and the reality of what has really happened.

The list includes surrender to Brussels
The freebies scandal
The Mandelson affair
Chagos islands debacle
Soft justice
Ballooning welfare
Youth worklessness
Record taxes
Doctors strikes
School fees.

Those expecting a big change are going to be disappointed because Burnham has declared fiscal rules remain the same - no borrowing for day to day spending.

So it's increased taxes to pay for spending, Land Value Tax is his form of wealth tax, not a new concept several countries use it notably Australia.

I agree Basgetti totally unnecessary and rude.

What a nasty thread title. SKS has been the head of the CPS and PM. What have you achieved, OP?

Thanks ! I thought it was a tv channel in the UK 🤪🤪🤪. Im a bit duh this a.m.

Main stream media nanna8.

Just wondering what MSM is.
LemonJam that is a very good post and I agree with most of it. I still think Starmer was delusional, though. Especially towards the end of his reign.

MollyNew

Excellent post, LemonJam, I'm glad you had the patience to write almost exactly what I was thinking.

Me too

Excellent post, LemonJam, I'm glad you had the patience to write almost exactly what I was thinking.

Primrose53

You can list as many great things that you think Starmer has achieved but if he is that great how come he was so unpopular that even his own party wanted him out?

Maybe because, as with Thatcher, the party recognised they would lose voters.

I suppose they could hardly ignore the constant chanting of "two-tier Keir" and the insistent, laddish, "Starmer is a w**ker" and the constant accusations that he/the party was not doing anything to deter the 'illegals'.

Perhaps also they want to keep their jobs and think they stand a better chance of doing so under Burnham?

I don't know - have they actually articulated why they turned against him?

Primrose53 because he wasn't connecting with the "masses" and didn't blow his own trumpet (and he didn't have a great comms team to blow it for him).

I’m just wondering who are the people on here? and what does it tell us about why we lose good people?