Labour Party politics

ASCPFC said:
I always thought that Starmer would come out eventually, but that it would be used to garner votes. If that's the case, their whole strategy would have to change.
I can think of three other possible strategies to garner votes: Rayner, appeal to the Labour roots - particularly women.
Miliband - try to get Green votes back.
Khan - never mentioned really but London powerbase. Take the Islamic vote from Galloway and Greens too.

Currently, they're very Blue Labour when they talk, but very Labour when they actually do anything. In other words, talk tough and responsible, yet never manage to get anything done. In particular, always managing to upset some section of their own support when they do anything. Largely reminds me of British Leyland.
Click to expand...
What tell jokes like Bernard Manning. 😆 😆 😆
 

Starmer insists 'majority' of Labour MPs back his leadership​

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer leaves after the multinational virtual summit and press conference at the Elysee Presidential Palace on April 17, 2026.
IMAGE SOURCE,REUTERS
By
Damian Grammaticas
News correspondent
    • Published
      26 April 2026, 03:43 BST
Updated 4 hours ago
Sir Keir Stamer has insisted the "vast majority" of Labour MPs supported him and wanted him to continue doing his job as prime minister.

He was speaking to the Sunday Times, external at the end of a week in which speculation about a potential leadership challenge has risen.

Sir Keir told the paper "in politics, you get this sort of thing all of the time, there is always talk".

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the prime minister should resign over his decision to appoint Lord Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US, adding that Labour MPs should "develop a backbone and get rid of him" if he did not step down.
Philp told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme that some ministers were "equivocating" over Sir Keir's future and that a couple of MPs were publicly calling on him to go.

He said it was in "the national interest" for MPs to remove the prime minister.
In his interview with the Sunday Times, Sir Keir said "what you never hear from are all the people who are supportive, loyal and just want to get on with the job. And that is the vast majority of people in the Parliamentary Labour Party".

"They're pleased to be in power," Sir Keir said of what he described as most Labour MPs.

"They've waited a long time to be in power. And they just want to get on with their job. They don't make a lot of noise about it. They don't talk to journalists about it. It's really important that is reflected in these debates."

The prime minister has faced calls from across opposition parties to resign and criticism from within his own party after it emerged that UK security officials had flagged concerns about giving vetting clearance to Lord Mandelson.

Sir Keir told MPs this week that the security officials had recommended against vetting approval being granted but that this had not been passed on to him.

He told the Sunday Times that he did not regret his decision last week to sack the most senior civil servant in the Foreign Office, Sir Olly Robbins, who had not informed him about the security vetting concerns.

"When there's a double red flag not to give clearance and [showing] high concern, then I'm sorry. I'm sorry. But I do not accept the argument that that is something which should not be told to the prime minister," Sir Keir said.

Sir Olly Robbins told MPs this week that he had not been told that there was a recommendation to deny Lord Mandelson security clearance, only that officials were "leaning against" it. Sir Olly decided to approve the vetting subject to mitigation being put in place.
Sir Keir dismissed the suggestion he should have done more to inquire about the outcome of Lord Mandelson's vetting process.

"When I'm told there's security clearance, should I go back and quiz officials and say, 'Are you telling me the truth?'

"If I questioned every bit of information put in front of me I would never get anything done. The number of decisions that have to be made each day is huge."

The prime minister told the paper that he wanted to focus on the wars in Ukraine and Iran rather than speculation about possible challenges to his leadership, as the effect of those conflicts for the UK was the most important issue facing the country.

"This is the urgent issue of our time," Sir Keir told the paper. "This is going to reshape our country.

"The conflict with Iran has not just been fought out in Iran. There are increasingly the use of proxies in this country. Of course there's lots of discussion in Parliament about who's up, who's down and all the rest of it. But this is the serious work of being the prime minister."

Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the prime minister, told the BBC that the government had "nothing to hide" over the appointment of Lord Mandelson, adding that it was "frustrating that so much time is being spent on this".

He said the upcoming elections in May were "going to be difficult" for Labour and that the "latest round of issues has made this slightly harder".

However, he said that, during his time campaigning, "not one person" had raised the subject of Lord Mandelson.
 
beak said:

Starmer insists 'majority' of Labour MPs back his leadership​

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer leaves after the multinational virtual summit and press conference at the Elysee Presidential Palace on April 17, 2026.
IMAGE SOURCE,REUTERS
By
Damian Grammaticas
News correspondent
    • Published
      26 April 2026, 03:43 BST
Updated 4 hours ago
Sir Keir Stamer has insisted the "vast majority" of Labour MPs supported him and wanted him to continue doing his job as prime minister.

He was speaking to the Sunday Times, external at the end of a week in which speculation about a potential leadership challenge has risen.

Sir Keir told the paper "in politics, you get this sort of thing all of the time, there is always talk".

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the prime minister should resign over his decision to appoint Lord Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US, adding that Labour MPs should "develop a backbone and get rid of him" if he did not step down.
Philp told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme that some ministers were "equivocating" over Sir Keir's future and that a couple of MPs were publicly calling on him to go.

He said it was in "the national interest" for MPs to remove the prime minister.
In his interview with the Sunday Times, Sir Keir said "what you never hear from are all the people who are supportive, loyal and just want to get on with the job. And that is the vast majority of people in the Parliamentary Labour Party".

"They're pleased to be in power," Sir Keir said of what he described as most Labour MPs.

"They've waited a long time to be in power. And they just want to get on with their job. They don't make a lot of noise about it. They don't talk to journalists about it. It's really important that is reflected in these debates."

The prime minister has faced calls from across opposition parties to resign and criticism from within his own party after it emerged that UK security officials had flagged concerns about giving vetting clearance to Lord Mandelson.

Sir Keir told MPs this week that the security officials had recommended against vetting approval being granted but that this had not been passed on to him.

He told the Sunday Times that he did not regret his decision last week to sack the most senior civil servant in the Foreign Office, Sir Olly Robbins, who had not informed him about the security vetting concerns.

"When there's a double red flag not to give clearance and [showing] high concern, then I'm sorry. I'm sorry. But I do not accept the argument that that is something which should not be told to the prime minister," Sir Keir said.

Sir Olly Robbins told MPs this week that he had not been told that there was a recommendation to deny Lord Mandelson security clearance, only that officials were "leaning against" it. Sir Olly decided to approve the vetting subject to mitigation being put in place.
Sir Keir dismissed the suggestion he should have done more to inquire about the outcome of Lord Mandelson's vetting process.

"When I'm told there's security clearance, should I go back and quiz officials and say, 'Are you telling me the truth?'

"If I questioned every bit of information put in front of me I would never get anything done. The number of decisions that have to be made each day is huge."

The prime minister told the paper that he wanted to focus on the wars in Ukraine and Iran rather than speculation about possible challenges to his leadership, as the effect of those conflicts for the UK was the most important issue facing the country.

"This is the urgent issue of our time," Sir Keir told the paper. "This is going to reshape our country.

"The conflict with Iran has not just been fought out in Iran. There are increasingly the use of proxies in this country. Of course there's lots of discussion in Parliament about who's up, who's down and all the rest of it. But this is the serious work of being the prime minister."

Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the prime minister, told the BBC that the government had "nothing to hide" over the appointment of Lord Mandelson, adding that it was "frustrating that so much time is being spent on this".

He said the upcoming elections in May were "going to be difficult" for Labour and that the "latest round of issues has made this slightly harder".

However, he said that, during his time campaigning, "not one person" had raised the subject of Lord Mandelson.
Click to expand...
100% delusional
 
beak said:
With a 400 seat majority this will be one big yawn.
Click to expand...
The Tories in their time had a number of these. He wont lose the vote the question is how many Labour MPs will abstain or vote against him?

Say it's about 80. This will embolden the rebels and the next time there is a vote (post May elections) you will probably see that more than double.

Thatcher actually won her vote of no confidence but had to go because so many voted against her.

If the number of abstains or votes against is above 100 even with a big majority he is in trouble. The rebels will argue that many voted for him because they are loyal to the party and don't want to help the Tories so the true number would be much higher.
 
Badger11 said:
The Tories in their time had a number of these. He wont lose the vote the question is how many Labour MPs will abstain or vote against him?

Say it's about 80. This will embolden the rebels and the next time there is a vote (post May elections) you will probably see that more than double.

Thatcher actually won her vote of no confidence but had to go because so many voted against her.

If the number of abstains or votes against is above 100 even with a big majority he is in trouble. The rebels will argue that many voted for him because they are loyal to the party and don't want to help the Tories so the true number would be much higher.
Click to expand...
My guess is a small handful , Starmer is the right wing within Labour and they are a large majority the left will not gain ascendancy.
 
Cabinet ministers have been rallying support for Sir Keir Starmer, ahead of a vote by MPs on whether he should face a parliamentary investigation over his claims about the vetting of Lord Mandelson.

The prime minister has denied accusations he misled MPs over whether the vetting for the role US ambassador followed "due process" and over his assertion that "no pressure whatsoever" was applied to officials at the Foreign Office.

Giving an impassioned speech to Labour MPs on Monday evening, the PM branded the vote, which was requested by the Conservatives, "pure politics" and urged them to "stand together against it".

The BBC has been told Labour MPs have been ordered to vote down the proposal.
It is unlikely the vote will pass as this would require a mass rebellion by Labour MPs and there is no evidence one is brewing.
 
beak said:
The prime minister has denied accusations he misled MPs over whether the vetting for the role US ambassador followed "due process" and over his assertion that "no pressure whatsoever" was applied to officials at the Foreign Office.
Click to expand...
He would, wouldn't he? [Mandy Rice-Davies]
 
beak said:
Cabinet ministers have been rallying support for Sir Keir Starmer, ahead of a vote by MPs on whether he should face a parliamentary investigation over his claims about the vetting of Lord Mandelson.

The prime minister has denied accusations he misled MPs over whether the vetting for the role US ambassador followed "due process" and over his assertion that "no pressure whatsoever" was applied to officials at the Foreign Office.

Giving an impassioned speech to Labour MPs on Monday evening, the PM branded the vote, which was requested by the Conservatives, "pure politics" and urged them to "stand together against it".

The BBC has been told Labour MPs have been ordered to vote down the proposal.
It is unlikely the vote will pass as this would require a mass rebellion by Labour MPs and there is no evidence one is brewing.
Click to expand...
If Starmer genuinely has nothing to hide then why not just agree to a parliamentary investigation ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top