Jump to content

The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

sadoldgit

By sadoldgit
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

The thing that makes no sense whatsoever is the value that the Musk-ites and the populists and the opportunists are putting on a "public enquiry". 

If back on, say. August 1st 2024 Kier Starmer had announced a full public enquiry into Grooming Gangs there is absolutely zero way that Musk or Rupert Lowe or Guido Fawkes or GB News or all these other divs would have been dancing in the streets about what a great move that was, well done Kier great job.

At best they wouldn't care much and at worst they would just say it's all just a platform for an establishment cover up. Years of chat and a report that pushes action into the long grass, another pointless government talking shop, jobs for the boys and a whitewash.

As we know, the last government did next to nothing with the output of the last enquiry.

If people really think a future enquiry is going to result in lots of brown people plus "do-gooder" social workers/evil council staff/other people they don't like are all going to get banged up, humilated, lined up and shot etc etc then they are going to be disappointed. 

Post Office enquiry - bad people banged up so far: zero. Maybe come 2027 there might be some criminal cases. 

The solutions to the problems in these areas are far to complicated for the twitterati to ever truly care about solving. All I can see is a load of opportunist posturing from people pretending that it's only them that care about child abuse.

 

Yep, I tend to lean towards the view that enquiries are often ineffectual and can be used as a political tool to push any action further into the  long grass. That said, if we're going to persist with enquiries (flawed as they might be) as a way of getting to the bottom of particular issues, then I don't see why they can't co-exist, in principle, if they are covering different facets.

Edited by trousers
  • Like 3
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

That consideration is what has caused half the problems in the first place. Now that those in charge has admitted that there is an issue with rape gangs of Pakistani Heritage, there has to be an investigation that establishes the extent of the problem, the cultural issues that have led to this problem, how much of the problem has been fuelled by animus towards females of another race etc etc. We need an unvarnished and unbiased investigation or it fails the victims and potentially creates future victims. 

Having an investigation of this type whilst implementing the recommendations  of the broader investigation regarding child sexual abuse should not be difficult to do. It should cause no delay at all. Regarding blame, it's more about accountability. There are names of council members and politicians who turned a blind eye and have simply moved elsewhere with promotions or with nothing attached to them. Rather like the Post Office, a full enquiry will partly be about holding these people accountable and getting some justice for the victims where many guilty parties have still not been brought to justice. 

That's a considered response, thank you.  

I can't agree that there wouldn't be a delay, unless your suggestion is to implement now what has been suggested, then investigate, then alter our approach as per the findings and recommendations of any further enquiry. In principle I see no issue with that, but my fear is that what's been proposed won't be implemented pending a new enquiry. If that's so, we get delay  which potentially exposes more poor kids to harm. 

Your post office point is a very good one, and the civil enquiry has started to right wrongs and give accountability. 

You're winning me over. 

 

  • Like 1
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, egg said:

That's a considered response, thank you.  

I can't agree that there wouldn't be a delay, unless your suggestion is to implement now what has been suggested, then investigate, then alter our approach as per the findings and recommendations of any further enquiry. In principle I see no issue with that, but my fear is that what's been proposed won't be implemented pending a new enquiry. If that's so, we get delay  which potentially exposes more poor kids to harm. 

Your post office point is a very good one, and the civil enquiry has started to right wrongs and give accountability. 

You're winning me over. 

 

Cheers for the response. What I would want to happen now is for the recommendations of the wider review to be implemented as soon as feasibly possible, then at the same time we can have an enquiry about this specific subset of child sexual abuse which seems quite specific and separate from the wider issue. If they're going to wait to implement anything before a wider enquiry then I agree that's stupid and there would be no need to. I can't see how further recommendations about the specifics of this issue would be likely to contradict what has already been implemented and where it may emphasise what has already been recommended, there is no harm in getting that implementation process underway. 

It's genuinely not an anti Muslim thing, I didn't pay a lot of attention to the specifics of this and I actually felt quite sick reading this a few weeks ago and understanding the extent of it. There's been a multitude of failings but there's undeniably a specific cultural issue here that has been largely buried and pushed away for fear of racism and actually this very real injustice is likely to make the problem of racism a lot worse if it isn't addressed. You would expect that reasonable people from the same communities would be equally disgusted by this and want to root it out from their societies. I'm sure that the average Pakistani Muslim has no desire to be associated with filth like this. 

Edited by hypochondriac
  • Like 1
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, whelk said:

But but but Andrew Neil’s hit piece. Comments @hypochondriac?

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-have-third-strongest-g7-growth-2025-imf-forecasts-2025-01-17/

Given this is good news, one assumes the current government will be claiming the credit for this one rather than pinning it on the previous government, like they do bad news? I think that's how these kind of things work, isn't it...? <insert winky thing>

Edited by trousers
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, trousers said:

Given this is good news, one assumes the current government will be claiming the credit for this one rather than pinning it on the previous government, like they do bad news? I think that's how these kind of things work, isn't it...? <insert winky thing>

Absolutely, if we don’t make it it’s Brexit’s fault

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, whelk said:

Absolutely, if we don’t make it it’s Brexit’s fault

Yep, I've seen that part of the script too... ;) 

  • Like 1
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, rooney said:

The City knows a thing or two.

These dumb city analysts clearly don’t realise the NI rise is going to cripple all businesses. Fools

Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)

Not even close Hypo - Truss’s was 80% https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-liz-truss-tories-least-popular-pm/

Sunak regularly 70%+. Badenoch in that range since becoming leader.

Spend less time on X folks https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/12/05/fact-check-keir-starmers-approval-score-is-not-lowest-on-record-for-uk-prime-ministers

Farage has the best leader rating at 20-30% negative, Davey after that. But neither likely to succeed under FPTP (I say that as a Lib Dem voter unfortunately). 

The two are about comparable on PM reckoning which is people saying who they’d actually consider voting for rather than sounding off after the fourth can of Special Brew. I don’t like Farage at all but no denying that he has significant popularity with more of a range of voters https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/51412-nigel-farage-and-keir-starmer-in-close-contest-for-best-prime-minister

After their formation the SDP were killing Thatcher and Foot in the polls and by-election storming wins. But it didn’t last (pity, they’d have been interesting). So early days to assess Reform’s sustained growth, hence the Xmas row with Badenoch about membership numbers. Thatcher got a Falklands boom but still would have had high disapproval ratings and higher still post-Miner’s Strike. Blair on Iraq. Still caned it in general elections. Trump just won an election comfortably despite them and Farage will be enjoying a boost from the profile there plus the data shows the public enjoyed him telling Musk to do one about Robinson. 
 

Edited by Gloucester Saint
Election, not ejection. Predictive flippin text…
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, whelk said:

https://news.sky.com/story/another-uk-stock-market-record-broken-13300270

These dopey market analysts are failing to realise that the Marxist Labour tax rises are crippling investment and there won’t be an entrepreneur left in the UK. Why the fuck have these simpletons not realised? Don’t they read Andrew Neil FFS?

Whilst this is not bad news by any means, if you read the article there's some important context to the headline. 

Edited by hypochondriac
SotonianWill

SotonianWill

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, whelk said:

https://news.sky.com/story/another-uk-stock-market-record-broken-13300270

These dopey market analysts are failing to realise that the Marxist Labour tax rises are crippling investment and there won’t be an entrepreneur left in the UK. Why the fuck have these simpletons not realised? Don’t they read Andrew Neil FFS?

Investors selling their shares in AI due to fears the market is shifting away from tech (led also by fears of higher interest rates down the line) does not show further investment. 

  • Like 2
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, SotonianWill said:

Investors selling their shares in AI due to fears the market is shifting away from tech (led also by fears of higher interest rates down the line) does not show further investment. 

Indeed. 'Safe havens' like tobacco giants BAT and imperial brands attracting investors legging it from tech stock, and people getting on the Smiths Group ahead of them being broken up, are not signs of support for British businesses. 

whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Broke lockdown again?

Go Daily Mail go. Turns out you were the one obsessed with cake after all.

  • Haha 2
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, whelk said:

Go Daily Mail go. Turns out you were the one obsessed with cake after all.

If he did break lockdown then surely it's simply holding Starmer to the same standard he held others. He was quite keen to call for resignations when it was his opponent. There's questions to answer at the very least. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

If he did break lockdown then surely it's simply holding Starmer to the same standard he held others. He was quite keen to call for resignations when it was his opponent. There's questions to answer at the very least. 

Genuinely couldn’t give a shit. 5 years ago and the desperation is laughable. 
 

  • Like 3
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, whelk said:

Genuinely couldn’t give a shit. 5 years ago and the desperation is laughable. 
 

I don't care I just think Starmer should be held to the same standard he has held others to. Nothing desperate about it. 

whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I don't care I just think Starmer should be held to the same standard he has held others to. Nothing desperate about it. 

I wasn’t meaning your desperation more the general desperations of Tories calling for further investigation and enquiry 

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, whelk said:

I wasn’t meaning your desperation more the general desperations of Tories calling for further investigation and enquiry 

Fair enough. There is political opportunism definitely but you could have accused Labour of exactly the same in opposition. That's the way of politics unfortunately. 

rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

It is a desperate distraction exercise from an opposition indelibly-tainted by Johnson-era corruption, and now out of ideas.

Only a few users of X consider it a story, because Elaine Musk has told them it is.

Barrel scraped.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, rallyboy said:

It is a desperate distraction exercise from an opposition indelibly-tainted by Johnson-era corruption, and now out of ideas.

Only a few users of X consider it a story, because Elaine Musk has told them it is.

Barrel scraped.

 

All he needs to do is explain how he didn't break the rules and it will be easily dismissed as being of no relevance. I'm sure he will be keen to do that. 

  • Haha 1
rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

A neutral might observe that there are 'one or two' more important questions still unanswered from that era -

Just off the top of my head, out of curiosity, why did Johnson have a secret meeting with an ex-KGB agent? Why did he miss five vital Cobra meetings? What exactly was the financial link between his government and Randox who were given £480m? How did Gove's friend get £164m of taxpayer money? How did Ayanda get £252M? Why was the unqualified Dido Harding appointed to her role? Where did her £40 billion budget disappear to? Why was superspreading Cheltenham allowed to run? Why was the government PR campaign declared unlawful? What exactly did Harding's husband the corruption minister investigate? Why did Matt Hancock give his own family Covid contracts? Why were established PPE companies ignored in favour of companies linked to cabinet ministers and Tory donors? Why did the promised forensic investigation into Pompey's accounts never materialise? Well done, you are concentrating. Why did Mrs Sunak's company take Covid cash? What is the business link between the Sunak family and Rupert Lowe? Why did Johnson give a random woman taxpayer funding? Why did he cover up donations? Why did he lie about the parties? Where did the secretive United and Cecil Club get their funds for the election? Why did Johnson protect a sex offender? Why did he lie to the Queen? Why did he appoint a known historic sex pest? But let's start with some voice coach who may or may not have done something a few years ago. Yeah, that's clearly the most serious question from the Covid era threatening to destabilise democracy. 🤣  

Once we've answered all the above, and I'm sure any reasonable person would like answers, let's find out what the fuck this voice coach was up to and when - Musk and his little simpleton army demand answers.....but only to that. 🤡

 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
SotonianWill

SotonianWill

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, rallyboy said:

A neutral might observe that there are 'one or two' more important questions still unanswered from that era -

Just off the top of my head, out of curiosity, why did Johnson have a secret meeting with an ex-KGB agent? Why did he miss five vital Cobra meetings? What exactly was the financial link between his government and Randox who were given £480m? How did Gove's friend get £164m of taxpayer money? How did Ayanda get £252M? Why was the unqualified Dido Harding appointed to her role? Where did her £40 billion budget disappear to? Why was superspreading Cheltenham allowed to run? Why was the government PR campaign declared unlawful? What exactly did Harding's husband the corruption minister investigate? Why did Matt Hancock give his own family Covid contracts? Why were established PPE companies ignored in favour of companies linked to cabinet ministers and Tory donors? Why did the promised forensic investigation into Pompey's accounts never materialise? Well done, you are concentrating. Why did Mrs Sunak's company take Covid cash? What is the business link between the Sunak family and Rupert Lowe? Why did Johnson give a random woman taxpayer funding? Why did he cover up donations? Why did he lie about the parties? Where did the secretive United and Cecil Club get their funds for the election? Why did Johnson protect a sex offender? Why did he lie to the Queen? Why did he appoint a known historic sex pest? But let's start with some voice coach who may or may not have done something a few years ago. Yeah, that's clearly the most serious question from the Covid era threatening to destabilise democracy. 🤣  

Once we've answered all the above, and I'm sure any reasonable person would like answers, let's find out what the fuck this voice coach was up to and when - Musk and his little simpleton army demand answers.....but only to that. 🤡

 

Is this from your notes app, chatgpt, or memory. If it’s the latter i’m impressed. 

aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

All he needs to do is explain how he didn't break the rules and it will be easily dismissed as being of no relevance. I'm sure he will be keen to do that. 

Was it breaking the rules if it was work? Who really cares.

Bozzo wasn’t kicked out for breaking covid rules, it was for telling blatant lies to Parliament.

  • Like 1
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Was it breaking the rules if it was work? Who really cares.

Bozzo wasn’t kicked out for breaking covid rules, it was for telling blatant lies to Parliament.

She wasn't employed by the Labour Party, it was Christmas Eve and the lockdown rules were very clear, as were the rules about moving between tiers. You also say 'who cares.' Kier Starmer cares, as evidenced by the numerous clips at the dispatch box imploring Johnson to resign for breaking the rules. 

Edited by hypochondriac
  • Haha 1
CB Fry

CB Fry

Posted
Posted

When is all the information about Kier Starmer's secret children coming out?

Guido Fawkes was wanking itself into a frenzy about that only a few months back. Must be any day now.

  • Like 2
Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

When is all the information about Kier Starmer's secret children coming out?

Guido Fawkes was wanking itself into a frenzy about that only a few months back. Must be any day now.

Couldn’t post it as he’d ruined his eyesight. Got past the point of driving to Barnard Castle to test it. Bashed his purple cobra down into a maggot with the excitement (as did a few sad sacks on here). Not that it probably functioned properly anyway after years of alcoholism, culminating in four alcohol-related convictions. Even Paul Merson is safer to get into a car with. 

No town would ever have enough stock in its pubs and off licences if Staines and GM went on an all dayer.

Edited by Gloucester Saint
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

When is all the information about Kier Starmer's secret children coming out?

Guido Fawkes was wanking itself into a frenzy about that only a few months back. Must be any day now.

Oh yeah forgot all about that - still believe it @hypochondriac?

  • Haha 1
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Was it breaking the rules if it was work? Who really cares.

Bozzo wasn’t kicked out for breaking covid rules, it was for telling blatant lies to Parliament.

It was because practically his whole cabinet had enough of him and he ran out of appointments. 
Tories are a fucking joke and don’t have a clue how to connect with electorate as it stands. Try and be a grown-up party FFS and you might stand a chance

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...