What are the complaints of our former ministers? This morning, Miatta Fahnbulleh resigned from her minister of religion post, saying that the government had not acted with "vision, pace, and ambition", nor that Labour had governed in a way that was "clear about our values and strong in our convictions." She went on to say that the public's verdict on Starmer's leadership was unmistakable: he had to go. There wasn't much of a critique in Fahnbulleh's letter, except she drew attention to the winter fuel debacle and the shameful attack on disabled people as "mistakes".
Our second resigner was safeguarding minister Jess Phillips. Her letter was pretty damning and attacked the plodding complacency of this government. She talked about how groomed children can be blocked from making naked images of themselves and that this technology could already be rolled out, were it not for Number 10's indifference. Phillips added that Labour governments are "precious" and "I'm not sure we are grasping this rare opportunity with the gusto that's needed." That's why Starmer has to give way. Fun fact, to my knowledge Phillips is the only MP who has her photo on official Commons correspondence.
She was followed approximately an hour later by Alex Davies-Jones. She said results in Wales and the rest of the UK were "catastrophic". No disagreements there. But she is impatient. "Now is the time for bold radical action", she declares. I guess Davies-Jones is not too familiar with Labourism's history. Labour needs to be seize opportunities after 14 years out of power, and "I implore you to act in the country's interest and set out a timetable for your departure."
Last was Wes Streeting ally, Zubir Ahmed. In a display of attempted gravitas rarely seen among Labour MPs, he writes "... as I raise my gaze above the daily work of ministerial life, it is clear to see that whatever the magnitude of individual achievements and progress, they are now being dwarfed and undermined by a lack of values-driven leadership at the centre." He provides flavoursome anecdotes from Scottish doorsteps, and condemns the "noise" from government that "became the midwife" of another SNP government. And to round it off, Ahmed revives the old country-before-party mantra and hurls it back in Starmer's face.
How handy, how coincidental that these "uncoordinated" letters covered all corners of Great Britain. But they are all weak sauce politically speaking. But one letter, coming from the pen of the only soft left figure here, ventured a political criticism. The others are all about distractions and not enough deliverism. For the centre and the right of the PLP fundamentally agree with Starmer that the problem is less one of political direction and more a case of not getting there fast enough. Which indicates they haven't learned any lessons at all, and their urgency stems from the imaginary KPIs they have flashing in their heads. One has to ensure the CV is suitably burnished before 2029 returns them to something like normal life.
It's now widely reported that Streeting will be meeting Starmer on Wednesday morning ahead of the King's speech. But for what purpose? He might have the required 81 MPs needed to trigger a contest, but seeing as a substantial body of PLP opinion are against having one, would Streeting run the risk of alienating swathes of people who might otherwise be favourably disposed toward his candidacy? We'll find out tomorrow afternoon following the announcement of the legislative programme. Though, Ed Miliband is reportedly now prepared to run if Streeting forces a contest, which would be amusing and a sure fire way of seeing the darling of for-profit health interests off.
Image Credit
6 comments:
And those sent out to defend Sir K seem to want us to believe that, though there have been some errors or mistakes, the big decisions were right and the main problem is informing people of how much has been done for them. The big decision seems to be not getting openly involved in attaking Iran - which the UK was not initially invited to do since the US and Israel thought it would be a breeze.
You cannot actually conceive that the defenders believe what they are being told to say. Have the forgotten the 14+ u turns on policy, Mandelson, support for genocide in Gaza, attacks on civil liberties, etc. It seems that McSweeney, remember him, chose the new cadre of MPs well. His Fusiliers are going over the top into oblivion without questioning the sense of their scripts. The problem is they are leaving the rest of us to face a Reform Government stripped of protective legislation on free speech, public association and rights to organise and demonstrate, plus precedents in imprisoning people for minor actions down to holding up A4 paper with some word hand written on it. It is a hard rain that is going to fall!
In my day the only people doing any ‘delivering’ were from the post office, the paper shop, the milk, coal suppliers etc. What’s with all these terms, taken from manual labour, like ‘delivering’, ‘workshop’, ‘putting in a shift’, ‘doing the heavy lifting’ blah blah, that get applied to white collar jobs?
I think, to hammer home (more manual labour metaphors) the delivery theme, Starmer should, instead of doing the mandatory photo-op in a high-viz jacket and a hard hat, jump on a lecy bicycle and do a delivery run for Pronto Pizza, dropping off lukewarm meals to the masses. That stunt would definitely improve his prole authenticity rating (PARs) on Angie, Wes and Andy……..
With dark rumours circulating of financebots threatening a run on the pound if we have another change of PM right now, perhaps it's that more than anything else which Starmer can thank for retaining his head.
Doesn't Starmer cause the potential financial problems by not going quietly? If he said that he realised that the election results were a clear message and he would facilitate an orderly hand over to 'safe Wes' or someone else favoured by the markets then the threat would be mitigated. It is his determination to have a scorched earth approach to going that is the problem.
I don't see how that works. "Safe Wes" produces no recovery in the polls, no hope of avoiding a wipeout in 2029, and is not accepted by half of the PLP on that basis alone, guaranteeing a repeat of the drama within a matter of months. So to imagine that the markets are salved by such a move, you have to imagine that they are completely blind to that reality.
And we now know that "safe Wes" is going to force the issue anyway, having gone ahead with his pre-announced resignation.
On the bright side, looks a lot like Reform won't have any money to pay their storm troopers or run their concentration camps. Unless Putin and a couple of billionaires offer to foot the bill.
Post a Comment