Labour’s Diane Abbott u-turn reveals the power of Rayner

The supposed leader of the Labour Party is supposed to be Sir Kier Starmer MP, but in reality is it the Deputy Leader Angela Rayner MP.

From the outcomes and intrigues of the past few days the power of Rayner appears to surpass that of Starmer.

Starmer was reluctant to state a decision on whether Diane Abbott MP could stand for Labour in her constituency of Hackney North and Stoke Newington. He stated the decision was with the National Executive Committee (NEC), but not apparently the view of Rayner who came out in support of Diane Abbott with then another apparent u-turn by Starmer with him agreeing with Rayner without the apparent consent of the NEC.

Is Rayner the real Leader of the Labour Party and if so why the deception.

We expect not to trust the Tories with very good reasons and apparently now not to trust Labour, but then did we ever and do any of us have any trust in politics no matter who the Party is. We apparently do need politics but only because we have been groomed to believe so.

The power should be with the people not just when there are elections but all the time, so is the time right to ensure that the power is with the people and needs seen to be for it is long past the time it should be. For this to occur there has to be honesty, transparency and accountability none of which there is currently and apparently no Party wishing it to be so. For those with the assumed power wish to retain it, and that is not democratic, let’s be the first country to have a real democracy and give and allow power to the people.

That is revolutionary but it is right for it to be. But no Party will take it forward as it means they will have to relinquish the power they believe they have.

It is not just Tory governments that have made major mistakes for they all do. It is not wrong to make mistakes as long as there is learning from making the mistakes, but learning never occurs for to learn there has to be a willingness to learn which there isn’t in any government and not only in government but many other areas, which is why we have scandals after scandals.

Learning is important and should always be so for it is how improvements are made.

If learning had been the ‘norm’ many years ago we could be so much better than we are now. The Status Quo may be a good group but not ideal in life. Change for the better is always needed and that comes from learning.

Don’t fear change just welcome it.

The Labour slogan is Change, Change  but change to what, is it changes to see some of the same. Perhaps it is but under a different colour, red instead of blue, but how much of red is there than the current blue. Is it a tinge of red in blue or a tinge of blue in red and what is the extent of the tinge. Only time will tell for Labour and Starmer won’t unless there is another Starmer U-turn and for that we will need to wait for Rayner to speak out.

https://www.politics.co.uk/tag/labour/

Keir Starmer offers ‘change’, ‘change’ and even more ‘change’. But that’s not the same as governing

It is not just a change but the degree of change and with Starmer v Sunak the degree is not great. The two people will be different and so will the Parties in name, but the problems will still be the same. Perhaps some in a degree of control of the government, but many not within government control.

Even matters within the UK may in some respects not be within the control of government and those outside of the UK will not be, but all will be relevant to how matters progress.

Starmer and his to be cabinet are in  many respects to be unknown for being in opposition is so different to be at the face of everything.

But Sunak and his cabinet haven’t done us many if any favours. The finance may be better than it was, but it was in a very dire state so any improvement would have been welcome. Then many other problems still have to be sorted, but some could be on the way, but the way is still too long.

Maybe Starmer should be given a chance, but if he doesn’t come good we could have 4/5 years of more problems, assuming he lasts that long.

There are many problems still to solve and no certainty they will be. We will hope that other problems won’t surface because we couldn’t cope with anymore disasters or could we.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/23/keir-starmer-change-governing-tories-labour-ideology-election?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Natalie Elphicke’s anti-strike stance ‘incompatible’ with Labour, says TUC president

Perhaps, the unions should be listened to as the Natalie Elphickep MP defection to Labour is in many respects unbelievable. How can such a right wing MP be so compatible with the Labour Party principles.

What would make more sense is a Tory ploy to infiltrate the Labour Party  by having a Tory plant within Labour.

Some may say that would be farfetched but it happens often in areas of espionage so why not in politics. It would be a new approach but the Tories are currently so dysfunctional they may be using dysfunction as a strength and be placing a Tory into Labour.

Elphicke has already stated she won’t be standing at the next election so won’t have any influence after the next election when a Labour win is almost inevitable. But a rightwing Tory in Labour could be some aspect to bring some dysfunction into Labour, not the heart of Labour but some way in.

It could lead to infighting in Labour to some extent to be a mask to the seen dysfunction within the Tory party. The Tories are desperate and this could be seen as an unexpected act.

We all know that politics is a very dirty game, so,  has it become even dirtier, perhaps so and to some extent so unexpected, especially from a so dysfunctional Tory party.

All is possible in today’s climate.

Has Sir Kier Starmer MP been wrong footed by a dysfunctional Tory Party maybe or maybe not.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/12/natalie-elphicke-anti-strike-stance-incompatible-with-labour-tuc-boss?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Kier Starmer should listen to Robert Jendrick

Easier said than done for who in government listens to anyone certainly not those who know more than them

Then who is to say that those who know more actually do know more is it the right know more.

The NHS is quoted as being an area which has been subjected to much change, but again it is debatable if it was the right change at the wrong time or the right time but the wrong change or any variations and whether sufficient finance was made available and many other aspects.

Yes, the Home Office is too large with cumbersome processes and are those who will need to manage change onboard with the need for change, if not, would they create barriers to hinder change.

In fact, are they creating barriers to delay processes to manage the delays already within the Home Office. As the ones needed to manage the current processes would be the same who would manage change.

Can you trust Civil Servants as I’m the days of the TV programmes Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister it was clear you couldn’t. But they were TV programmes for entertainment so they couldn’t be true to life could they.

Currently with immigration it is believed there is too much and not just illegal immigration, but legal immigration, but is that true . For with an insufficiency of a required workforce is not more immigration required, but the required immigration.

If more legal routes were available and the assessment process was done before immigrants came over to the UK the process would be better.

But it is not just immigration but all areas of the Home Office for are any areas working efficiently and effectively.

I believe the Home Office systems need a drastic overall. Ideally scrap what  there is and change them for the better, but for goodness sake don’t rely on Fujitsu as we only need to look at the Post Office to know that.

Jendrick may know change is required but that is different to knowing if it is the right change or changes.

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/keir-starmer-should-listen-to-robert-jenrick-3050649?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Sunday_Opinion%202024-05-12&utm_term=editorial_opinion_active_users

Four years late

Not sure what Natalie Elphicke MP is but she sure is not Labour

. So now Labour are apparently welcoming anyone or is it just Sit Kier Starmer MP, into Labour except Diane Abbott. Diane was Labour MP until she made some inappropriate comments for which she had apologised for and she summarily had the Labour Whip withdrawn and no longer, apparently welcome in Starlets Labour Party, but apparently Elphicke is. So what is the difference, well Elphicke is very right wing politically, while Abbott is very much left wing and even worse was a Jeremy Corbyn supporter.

You would feel being left wing Abbott would be very welcome in Labour while Elphicke being very tight wing wouldn’t be welcome into Labour.

But that appears not to be how Starmer is as it looks like for Starmer being right wing is much better than being left wing.

I do wonder if this has been put to Labour supporters by Starmer or does he believe they won’t notice.

But this is politics where there are no beliefs anymore well not with Starmer  who appears to want to convert the Labour Party to be the Conservative Party. While the Conservative Party becomes who knows what.

No wonder no one trusts politicians and political parties anymore.

They talk or appear to talk because you see their mouths move but what you hear them say can’t be believed or trusted, but then could you ever.

.

https://link.news.inews.co.uk/view/5eb404ef4ad0dd0eeae74013l1b8j.n6t/a2f28269

Natalie Elphicke: Keir Starmer faces Labour anger after Tory MP’s defection | BBC News

MPs who would have them, well it appears Sir Kier Starmer MP will as his latest addition from the Conservatives, Natalie Elphicke MP is a complete surprise, not only to many Conservative MPs. Perhaps many is not the correct word, as those MPs are diminishing, but even more it is surprising many Labour MPs and again that may be the wrong word as anger seems more appropriate.

From the previous utterances of Elphicke one would assume she is somewhat ‘right wing’ in her views and certainly not a lover of the Labour Party, but perhaps she has seen the light or completely blinded.

With Starmer accepting Elphicke it could be that he is wanting to make Labour more Conservative than the Conservative Party. This is expressly so with his apparent refusal to withdraw her suspension Diane Abbott MP and reattain ‘The Whip‘.

One would have assumed that Elphicke was more attuned with the Reform UK party than Labour.

Who would understand MPs, well it appears hardly anyone, perhaps not even themselves.

Source : Natalie Elphicke: Keir Starmer faces Labour anger after Tory MP’s defection | BBC News