| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn 14:38 - Feb 16 with 3445 views | Pinewoodblue |
The government has abandoned their bid to delay the local elections to 30 councils in England.
Local Government Secretary Steve Reed has decided to "withdraw his decision" to postpone the elections, due to take place in May, "in the light of recent legal advice", according to a letter from the Government Legal Department shared by Nigel Farage.
It is a victory for Reform UK and Farage, who had taken the government to court in a bid to prevent the elections being delayed.
A two-day High Court hearing was due to start on Thursday, but the government will now "seek to agree an order" with Reform UK to end its case, and the government "will agree to pay the claimant's costs of these proceedings".
In a post on X, Farage wrote: "We took this Labour government to court and won.
"In collusion with the Tories, Keir Starmer tried to stop 4.6 million people voting on May 7th. Only Reform UK fights for democracy." |  |
| |  |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 04:25 - Feb 17 with 741 views | Benters |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 20:19 - Feb 16 by Bigalhunter |
It’s a comfort that you’re probably daft enough to roll up at the wrong polling station, I guess.
Don’t forget to keep unrolling that big ball of string behind you or you’ll end up relying on your resident apologist to talk you through finding your way back home as well… |
Balls!
I will give you that one as it’s funny  |  |
| |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 05:17 - Feb 17 with 721 views | Benters |
I’ve just seen it said that it’s Starmers 16th u turn | |
| |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 08:56 - Feb 17 with 652 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 05:17 - Feb 17 by Benters |
I’ve just seen it said that it’s Starmers 16th u turn |
Perhaps we should have a sweepstake on what number 16 will be. | |
| |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 09:03 - Feb 17 with 642 views | chicoazul |
This government is absolutely hilarious. |  |
| |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 10:17 - Feb 17 with 587 views | Benters |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 09:03 - Feb 17 by chicoazul |
This government is absolutely hilarious. |
Useless ain’t they ba. | |
| |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 11:09 - Feb 17 with 559 views | Churchman |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 16:53 - Feb 16 by redrickstuhaart |
What is the alternative? |
I think everyone would like the answer to that. But OF71s point is valid in my view.
Beyond a long since gone image of miners lamps, tin bath in front of the fire, LS Lowry people mooching to the factory what is the ‘Working Class’ in 2026? Has that glass ceiling been shattered? Open question because I don’t have the answer.
Labour's manifesto pledged to "not increase taxes on working people", but they couldn’t define who working people were. They didn’t know. In other words it was a sound bite with a nod to the past which became a mess they tried to wriggle away from.
Fortunately for them, it didn’t matter because governments lose elections, opposition never win them and the tories were so bankrupt, people would have voted for turds on a stick with a non blue rosette over that tub of corruption.
Back to the point, the election was the first sign to me that they didn’t know what they were doing. If they could come up with a mantra then nail a policy to it, all based on something they couldn’t even define, it didn’t bode well beyond flushing away the tories.
Then we get into the u turns. The latest on local elections. Why did they not seek legal advice before doing what they did? I’m sure their motives were as pure as preventing Burnham standing as an MP purely on the basis of cost (yeah, right), but it looked like they were just trying to bin an election because they were going to get a pasting. I’m sure they’d never do such a thing….
Starmer looks weak. He is obviously intelligent, given his qualifications in Law, but that doesn’t make him anything more than insubstantial. I gather he wasn’t up to much at DPP and CPS beyond record expenses claims, but that might just be malicious people putting the boot in without knowledge.
He opposed Brexit, but listening to what he had to say on it made no sense at all despite him being on the right side of the argument. Starmer seems a pleasant sort of man, but lost in the job. He reminds me of a chap I worked with who was one of the top legal dudes at HMRC. A lovely, caring man he was one of the cleverest people I ever met (and saved the hard working taxpayer £ millions with some of the stuff he’d done), but he had no leadership skills whatsoever.
Starmer looks finished to me and not before time. Under his leadership, they had time to prepare for government but appear to have hosed that up the wall because from day one they’ve looked a mess and the u turns are evidence of that. Their very limited actions seem to be purely around propping up their perceived support.
All this is playing to the hand of the alternative - Farage’s nutjobs. At the moment, a lot of sane people are in denial. They think that support for Reform will dribble away and their peculiar view of the world will get them found out. That it’ll be ok. It won't necessarily be and the threat is there because Farage communicates with simple resonating messages, just as Trump does and Hitler did.
So Sir Kier, get your finger out. Stop blaming others and start governing for the people, not just yourself and your party, - and be clearer and more honest too.
Edit: apologies for the over long rant. [Post edited 17 Feb 11:14]
|  | | |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 11:29 - Feb 17 with 523 views | DJR |
I posted this a few weeks ago, and if the debacle over whether elections should take place is anything to go by, I'm not convinced they are going to get the reorganisation itself right in such a short period time. Indeed, I am inclined to think the reorganisation may now have to be delayed.
"My understanding is that elections in Suffolk had already been delayed by a year, and I do wonder if part of the problem is that the government is trying to rush through extensive and very complicated changes to local government, which I assume will themselves only add to the costs of local government in the sense of the need to prepare for the new system. And this at a time when local government finances are stretched.. Indeed, I am not wholly convinced that in the long run the changes will save anything.
I hadn't really looked closely at what is going on before now, but in Kent where I live there is little consensus between the various councils and different areas as to the form the changes should take. Indeed, five different proposals have been forwarded to the Secretary of State, and how he is expected to make the right choice in such a short space of time (when having to make many similar decisions in relation to different areas) is beyond me.
https://www.canterburysociety.
All of these proposals involve the swallowing up of what seems to me to the the perfectly rational existing unitary authority for Medway. In addition, they involve the creation of much bigger local authorities, for areas which could be said to have little in common, the result of which it seems to me will dilute local accountability. And in the case of, say, education, this will be split, say, four ways, rather than being county-wide, which seems to me to only add to the bureaucracy." [Post edited 17 Feb 12:01]
|  | | |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 11:33 - Feb 17 with 515 views | DJR |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 11:09 - Feb 17 by Churchman |
I think everyone would like the answer to that. But OF71s point is valid in my view.
Beyond a long since gone image of miners lamps, tin bath in front of the fire, LS Lowry people mooching to the factory what is the ‘Working Class’ in 2026? Has that glass ceiling been shattered? Open question because I don’t have the answer.
Labour's manifesto pledged to "not increase taxes on working people", but they couldn’t define who working people were. They didn’t know. In other words it was a sound bite with a nod to the past which became a mess they tried to wriggle away from.
Fortunately for them, it didn’t matter because governments lose elections, opposition never win them and the tories were so bankrupt, people would have voted for turds on a stick with a non blue rosette over that tub of corruption.
Back to the point, the election was the first sign to me that they didn’t know what they were doing. If they could come up with a mantra then nail a policy to it, all based on something they couldn’t even define, it didn’t bode well beyond flushing away the tories.
Then we get into the u turns. The latest on local elections. Why did they not seek legal advice before doing what they did? I’m sure their motives were as pure as preventing Burnham standing as an MP purely on the basis of cost (yeah, right), but it looked like they were just trying to bin an election because they were going to get a pasting. I’m sure they’d never do such a thing….
Starmer looks weak. He is obviously intelligent, given his qualifications in Law, but that doesn’t make him anything more than insubstantial. I gather he wasn’t up to much at DPP and CPS beyond record expenses claims, but that might just be malicious people putting the boot in without knowledge.
He opposed Brexit, but listening to what he had to say on it made no sense at all despite him being on the right side of the argument. Starmer seems a pleasant sort of man, but lost in the job. He reminds me of a chap I worked with who was one of the top legal dudes at HMRC. A lovely, caring man he was one of the cleverest people I ever met (and saved the hard working taxpayer £ millions with some of the stuff he’d done), but he had no leadership skills whatsoever.
Starmer looks finished to me and not before time. Under his leadership, they had time to prepare for government but appear to have hosed that up the wall because from day one they’ve looked a mess and the u turns are evidence of that. Their very limited actions seem to be purely around propping up their perceived support.
All this is playing to the hand of the alternative - Farage’s nutjobs. At the moment, a lot of sane people are in denial. They think that support for Reform will dribble away and their peculiar view of the world will get them found out. That it’ll be ok. It won't necessarily be and the threat is there because Farage communicates with simple resonating messages, just as Trump does and Hitler did.
So Sir Kier, get your finger out. Stop blaming others and start governing for the people, not just yourself and your party, - and be clearer and more honest too.
Edit: apologies for the over long rant. [Post edited 17 Feb 11:14]
|
You don't ever have to apologise for what you post, as it is always thought provoking. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 12:47 - Feb 17 with 413 views | TRUE_BLUE123 |
The messaging and decision making at the top of the Labour party is frankly pathetic. Incompetence of the highest level. |  |
| |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 13:02 - Feb 17 with 384 views | HarleydavidsonBlue |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 15:03 - Feb 16 by NthQldITFC |
Wrong and utterly idiotic. Even to suggest that in the first place was bound to draw fire (quite rightly) and to shoot yourself in the foot (mixed but related metaphors!). To then, inevitably, have to back away from it is like blowing your other foot off with a sawn-off and hoping that will allow you to walk reasonably evenly again.
At a time when we need all of the decent, responsible, competent (ish?) parties to keep the slavering right wing loonies away from the tiller of the ship of state, we've got Labour doing everything they can to allow the fruitcakes in.
Some of you may think you'd like a bit of fruitcake, but I can guarantee that it will make us very, very sick for a very long time, and you'll go right off it very quickly. |
As opposed to the lying left wing loonies that have been in power for the last 20 months ! |  | | |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 13:31 - Feb 17 with 340 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 13:02 - Feb 17 by HarleydavidsonBlue |
As opposed to the lying left wing loonies that have been in power for the last 20 months ! |
 | |
| |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 14:04 - Feb 17 with 306 views | DJR |
Another fine mess Reed has created.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk
"‘Betrayed’: 21 Hartlepool councillors threaten to quit Labour over care budget
Exclusive: Council in one of England’s poorest areas says it needs urgent help with ballooning children’s social care bill"
The fact is that Labour Together are successors to the Blairites who always felt closer to Cameron than to Brown: the following from a 2012 Times article being an example.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/po
"Tony Blair and David Cameron are forging a “special relationship” across a range of matters, with the former Prime Minister visiting Chequers and the pair talking several times on the telephone.
Mr Blair visited Mr Cameron’s country residence last July, the same month as the phone-hacking scandal erupted, in a meeting never previously disclosed by Downing Street.
The subjects for discussion have ranged from foreign policy, including the eurozone, to Civil Service reform and the strains of leading the country,according to reports. Mr Blair has also talked to Steve Hilton, Mr Cameron’s longstanding adviser, who left earlier this month, with other senior Blairites helping the coalition.
Lord Adonis, the Labour peer who pioneered the schools academy programme and who is close to Mr Blair, made an undisclosed visit to Downing Street in the past few days. The peer, who accepted a job assisting Labour’s policy review a fortnight ago, said last night that he was in No 10 to discuss high-speed rail, “a great cross-party project” and urging Mr Cameron to legislate for it as soon as possible.
Mr Cameron and Mr Blair spoke on the phone in January and February this year and have another call scheduled for September. The Prime Minister and his inner circle have made little secret of the high esteem in which they hold Mr Blair, studying his autobiography for lessons in statecraft.
Mr Blair has always refrained from aggressive criticism of the coalition, apart from a rare foray into commentary on the Government after the Budget, when he suggested that the charity tax was unwise.
The relationship between the two men is likely to cause significant discomfort in the Labour Party, whose supporters may be disappointed at any impression that Mr Blair is helping their political opponents. Mr Cameron once called himself an “heir to Blair” at a private event." [Post edited 17 Feb 14:08]
| | | |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 21:06 - Feb 17 with 166 views | DJR |
This has made the front page of the Guardian, and I imagine will be picked up by other news outlets.
https://www.theguardian.com/po
"Norfolk council leader pulls out of long-awaited devolution deal over election U-turn
Kay Mason Billig accuses Steve Reed of forcing council to agree to poll delay in return for extra funding and powers"
From what I know of him Reed has always struck me as a bit of a bully, and it interesting to note there are now serious allegations against two former directors of Labour Together.
As it is, I questioned in an earlier post whether the reorganisation could be delivered on time, and I wonder now whether it will even see the light of day if councils are choosing not to co-operate.
It's a complete and utter shambles.
EDIT: this from the Guardian article mirrors points I made in an earlier post.
"As well as the concerns about the political impact of the postponed elections, some Labour MPs are also sceptical about the wider idea of reorganising councils, disputing the idea it will save money and warning that many of the new unitary authorities risk feeling too large and remote for many voters.
One backbencher said: “I just don’t get why you would do something as complex and risky as this in a first term. It’s a second-term project, at best.” [Post edited 17 Feb 21:10]
| | | |
| Another Starmer ‘U’ turn on 21:56 - Feb 17 with 142 views | DJR |
A bit from the Guardian indicating why the government backtracked.
Why did the government think it was legal to postpone these elections?
Ministers have postponed local elections before. Last year Angela Rayner, as local government secretary, announced that elections for nine councils would be delayed to allow them to carry out a major reorganisation.
That reorganisation, which is aimed at ending two-tier authorities where district councils work alongside county ones, is still under way, which is why Reed said another set of local elections should be postponed this year.
Officials say he was warned before deciding to postpone 30 elections – five of which had already been postponed last year – that it was likely to be challenged in court.
What changed?
Officials say it was not that the legal advice changed, rather that lawyers became more explicit that the government was likely to lose as the judicial review continued.
Reed’s decision differed from that of his predecessor last year in a few ways.
First, the number of authorities affected by his announcement was much higher and five of them would be delaying elections for a second time.
Second, before taking his decision, he wrote an article for the Times in which he argued that voters would not want to take part in elections for “short-lived zombie councils” that would soon be abolished as part of the reorganisation.
Some critics believe this article would have been used as evidence that Reed had already made up his mind before deciding whether to delay elections, and if so in how many places. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
