Keir Starmer is more like John Smith than you think | Andrew Marr | The New Statesman
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 май 2024
- To win the general election, Keir Starmer should learn from Labour's historic 1992 loss - and "the greatest Prime Minister we never had"
Subscribe on RUclips: / @newstatesman
In 1992, Labour leader Neil Kinnock looked all but certain to win the general election. A shock defeat handed the Conservatives, under John Major, a record fourth term in office. Kinnock resigned, and the Labour leader who followed began a project to renew Labour's fortunes focusing on growth through fair treatment of working people. The parallels with today are striking. Andrew Marr outlines what Keir Starmer must learn from history, and one too short-lived Labour leader in particular.
Read Andrew Marr's column here: www.newstatesman.com/politics...
--
Andrew Marr is Political Editor for the New Statesman, and is one of the UK's most senior political journalists. He spent over 20 years at the BBC where he was Political Editor and hosted the wildly successful Andrew Marr show. He is now based in Westminster where he brings his deep experience of political reporting to his analysis of the most important events in UK politics. He also hosts Tonight with Andrew Marr on LBC Radio.
Watch more videos from Andrew Marr in this playlist: • Andrew Marr
--
The New Statesman brings you unrivalled analysis of of the latest UK and international politics. On our RUclips channel you’ll find insight on the top news and global current affairs stories, as well as insightful interviews with politicians, advisers and leading political thinkers, to help you understand the political and economic forces shaping the world.
With regular contributions from our writers including Political Editor Andrew Marr and Anoosh Chakelian - host of the New Statesman podcast - we’ll help you understand the world of politics and global affairs from Westminster to Washington and beyond.
Subscribe on RUclips: / @newstatesman
Sign up to Morning Call, the daily UK politics newsletter from the New Statesman: morningcall.substack.com
Subscribe to the New Statesman from just £1 per week: www.newstatesman.com/podcasto...
Watch all Andrew Marr's New Statesman videos here: ruclips.net/p/PLSfumUEfFlcIG6GaFtC82AQ1tmT-9JGhl
Can Keir Starmer keep Labour's new pledges? ruclips.net/video/01_8z64cAF4/видео.html
If ‘one’ were a betting person ‘one’ might say that there was more of a camel fitting through the eye of a needle.
The death of John Smith was an incalculable disaster for the UK.
Nice guys don't always make successful leaders, but agree it's a shame that he never got the chance to try.
He was murdered
Who is John Smith? No worries ... I'll google him!
I remembered something about him! My apologies, I'm from Brazil.
There was a programme about 20 years after his death when they asked prominent Tories and Liberals as well as Labour people how Britain would have been different if he had lived. All agreed we would have been a far better country. There isn’t a chance he would have crawled to Bush for starters and gone to war in Iraq.
Stodger isn’t fit to be mentioned in the same conversation.
RIP John Smith ,He would have been a great Prime Minister,
You cannot say that, because there is no hard evidence that it would have been. Sadly!
Is the next term of Khan's Mayorship going to be a huge success. Citizens of London seem to think so. Perhaps he has ambitions of being PM. Ha ha.
@@captaintorch983 I read the original comment as an opinion, we all know that he sadly passed away, so pretty clear that the comment was speculation. I agree that Khan is quite possibly a future PM. I feel sorry for the small number of car owners hit by ULEZ, but can't blame the guy for defending the air we all breath from pollution. Also his policy on school meals for infants is spot on. Nice chap.
@@captaintorch983everyone can have a opinion 👍🏻
@@markemark449ULEZ, of course, a policy initially put forward by Boris Johnson, and the implementation of it a firm condition of TFL getting post pandemic support funding from Westminster. Khan is just the messenger, the policy was written by the Tories. Folk should remember that, the next time they use it as a stick to beat Khan and Labour with.
Hard to quantify if JS would have been a great PM, but his absence (sadly in many ways) cleared the path for a youthful Tony Blair to ascend to apparent saint hood and all the good and ill that his premiership bought.
Starmer already riffed off of John Smith's 'non-Midas touch' barb against Major back in 1993, just changing the term to 'reverse-Midas touch' back in November. The fact that it tied in with the Elgin Marbles debacle from Sunak made it even funnier.
No it was Enoch Powell.
John Smith had more integrity than Starmer will ever have
100%correct
And humour too. Absolutely no resemblance.
Andrew Marr is one of the great horrors of political journalism. Him, Peston, Jeremy Vine - all total weirdos. I don't know where the BBC got them from. Oh and there's that silly German on Channel 4 as well.
@@clivet3252 Surely the MOST Horrific and Useless interviewer /presenter is Laura Kuenssberg.......
How doesn't Starmer have integrity? People just say stuff because they want a more radical leader
How different History would have been if John Smith had not passed so suddenly, so tragically. He certainly would not have taken us into Iraq. A great man, a superb Politician. Deep loss....for everyone. ❤❤
We will never know. I don't agree that he would have been a great leader and yes he would have taken us into Iraq because our American masters would have demanded it.
@@derekbrown3165 It certainly would have been very risky to split from the Americans on defence policy given how little money we have.
@@derekbrown3165 In 2003, seeing how much opposition to the Iraq war there was in the UK, Bush Jr told Blair he didn't need to provide invasion troops, the British could provide peacekeeping force after the war.
(Source- Bob Woodward "Bush at War" ).
It was Blair, not Bush, who sent British combat troops to Iraq. The Americans didn't demand it.
FWIW, Smith was much more pro-EU than Blair. I can quite easily see him lining up with Donald Rumsfeld's "Old Europe" than being knee-jerk pro-US like Blair.
@@FranzBieberkopf- Blair put it to a vote in the House . Half the cabinet abstained , ALL the Tories voted for war .
Starmers name shouldn’t be mentioned when talking about John Smith, poles apart.
John Smith the best Labour leader never to be the UK prime minister…after he died the Labour morals went with him…it’s sad what Labour have become!!..
Did You Watch the video?
Eh? You'll need to try harder than that.
Another one who doesn't undestand the realities of government and of trying to win power under FPTP
@@weswheel4834 yip watched all of it but when you have a Labour Party welcoming a right wing Tory into their domain you have to wonder what feckin planet are they on…John Smith would have chased this pro Boris the Bafoon Johnstone MP to a galaxy far far away..Labour as I’ve said lost their socialism the day he died…would I vote for Labour or the Tories I think not!…
Corbyn was the best PM we never had. Smeared to death by the establishment.
In hindsight it was naive to ever think they'd let him be PM, he was a threat to their established order. The masses are not allowed to win
Paid my respects at John Smiths resting place on Iona a number
Of years ago.
We really lost someone that would have taken us in much healthier direction.
RIP John
Andrew Marr conveniently misses out some key aspects of John Smith's leadership which make Starmer much less attractive. Smith was a far more tolerant and democratic Labour leader. For one thing he abandoned Kinnock's stalinistic factional style of leadership, reintroducing a balanced Shadow Cabinet which included both left and right wings of the Party.
Smith was also a decent politician who believed in principles and honesty. Starmer, on the other hand is unprincipled and dishonest, lying as if it is a second nature, as we have seen by his abandonment of all of his leadership campaign promises.
Last but not least, John Smith was his own man unlike Starmer who has sold his soul to Washington and does everything to appease the United States.
All of these differences will be rapidly exposed in the coming Labour government. To paraphrase Engels' old saying, John Smith's untimely passing was a tragedy, while Keir Starmer's elevation will prove to be a farce.
Tax and spend makes a hell a lot more economic sense than the other four alternative paths: 1) Borrow and spend (the McDonnell path); 2) Borrow and cut taxes (the Truss/Kwarteng path); 3). Cut spending and cut taxes (the Thatcherite path); 4). Cut spending and don’t cut taxes (the Cameron/Osborne path). If ‘Middle England’ wants any of the other paths bar tax and spend. Fine. But it’s their bank balances and quality of life, that will ironically take the long term hit.
Ironically the polling on political attitudes suggests it is now the progressive young who are least keen on paying more tax.
You forgot BoJo's & Sunak's option Tax, cut spending, spend in the wrong areas (wastefully spend it on Track & Trace, wipe off loans, etc etc ) or give it to their mates. I have more hope that Starmer will at least try to spend it on NHS, Schools, Border Forces, Green Energy etc I say give him a chance. He's right Corbyn may have been very popular with the young & poor but he scared the bejesus out of those paying the taxes!
I don't think it's as simple as that. It's about where you tax and where you spend that can make a whole lot of difference. And Cameron and Osborne did lift income tax thresholds.
A very concise and helpful assessment from Andrew Marr, thank you. I remember John Smith's sudden passing with deep sadness; he was, indeed, the best Prime Minister we never had. A thoroughly decent man, and the country was the poorer for his loss.
But it's quite clear that Starmer is not a decent man. So it's just nonsense from the weird Andrew Marr.
Except Starmer is listening to evil Mandelson and considering watering down what has been said on Workers Rights.
I think Mandelson is thoroughly malevolent, and Starmer is so weak to believe in watering down workers rights
@@rolandrothwell4840 👍
The greatest PM we never had.... R.I.P. John Smith x
I've visited John Smith's grave. It really is a profoundly beautiful location.
I still remember Marr gleefully announcing the Iraq war
Never has a surname been more apt
The Natalie Elphick of the New Statesmame
One of the great horrors of political journalism. A thoroughly weird bloke.
John Smith was a people's leader and was told early on to cut down on his unhealthy lifestyle. So like many potential great leaders in the past his own health took second place. Like Hugh Gaitskill in the early sixties Labour had potential good PM's
but personal health issues took them away from fulfilling their policies.
Gaitskill, a proto-Blair would have been awful.
I’m not only fed up with the Tories, but Andrew Marr.
Only the Tories? I'm fed up with all of them. There is no-one that is capable of running the country or anything else.
@@internetfairy1 Yes only the f’ing Tories. Do you include yourself in the “no-one “ in your second sentence, or all the internet fairies ?
@@californiadreamin8423 silly reply....
@@internetfairy1 You’re the internet fairy , not me. What do you expect !!!
@@californiadreamin8423grow up...
If you could defame the dead, this would be it.
Sir Starmer must learn the lesson of Clement Attlee,innovation,revolution,a Great Rearment and assertiveness on the World stage
The world does not want or need an assertive UK on its stage. We need to put that grandiose exceptionalist hogwash behind us.
‘Like Keir Starmer he was a great support of the trade unions’ ….. is that the same Keir Starmer who dismissed shadow cabinet ministers for standing on picket lines with RMT union workers?? Hmmmm
Both could be true. When Labour are in government, ministers standing on picket lines would be arguing against the government's own position, so wouldn't make sense. Starmer and his party can still support trade unions.
That's such a reactionary take. Tarry was sacked for making up policy on the spot and going rouge on the messaging.
No, The same Keir Starmer who was providing bro bono legal services to striking miners in the 1980s.
@@alexrobertssings Don't bring facts to the Novarasphere
Hes just being a tory.
Throwing one of the easiest open goals to get right wing votes.
Also, John Smith may have been at the centre of his party as it was at the time, but I think he would have been left of Tony Blair. Not massively so, but in some key policy areas. There was definitely a shift in the makeup of the party between 1994 and 1997, and I think we'd have had a different selections of candidates for the 97 election if Smith had remained as leader of Labour.
Keir Starmer must learn from this Labour leader, not sure that's true, but always good to learn from other were you can, but never be a slave to them, changing times and all that .
John Smith had integrity , Starmer does not !
He does have integrity.
What a ridiculous comment. Sir Keir has spent his previous career sending criminals to jail.
@@DonQuickZote he clearly doesn't
@@clivet3252 Does too.
@@DonQuickZote nothing he has done has shown an ounce of integrity. You can say the sky is green if you like, it doesn't make it true.
If you argue that John Smith mistepped by looking to his economic traditions to current problems that did not fit, the same applies to Reeves. She's falling back on the economic orthodoxies of growth through careful management and market driven investment. She's an inflexible economist 15 years behind the current landscape where wealth and inequality are the key drivers of economic woes.
Her latest speech moves us away from globalism to a more sustainable model.
The issue isn't GDP it's GDP per capita which has shrunk from 50k in 2010 to 45k now, reasons lack of government investment in social and physical infrastructure.
We need Tax and invest not so much tax and spend.
Investment is what’s needed.
The problem is, the likes of the mail don't understand the difference between spending for investment and other forms of spending.
The next election won't be like 1992, or even 1997; it will be like 1906.
Liberal landslide.
I think it will be like 1922 (except substituting the Liberal Party with the Tories).
@@katrinabryce It's all swings and roundabouts. Labour will get hit by factional infighting after gaining power and the public will slowly realise that all political parties are fragile coalitions with their fair share of corruption and incompetence. Plus ca change.
That would be bad for Labour considering 1906 was the last Liberal triumph before long term decline.
Under Smith. Labour clearly wouldn't have won a 'super landslide' majority (of around 180) like Blair (with his charisma and appeal to Middle England and the Murdoch Media). But they clearly would still have won a very comfortable working majority, probably still bigger than the one that the Tories won under Johnson in 2019. The 1997 election was already won for Labour after Black Wednesday and then after the Tories broke a key 1992 election promise by putting VAT on fuel. They were dead and buried from then on.
Blair inherited the best set of circumstances out of any incoming opposition leader that I can remember. The Tories had been in power for 15 years (so longer than they will have been in office by the time of the next general election), were deeply unpopular and were falling aparty with crisis after crisis and scandal after scandal on a weekly or even daily basis. The personal popularity that Major enjoyed at the time of 1992 election (which the Tories still lost 40 seats in as their majority was cut from around 100 to 20) had been destroyed. And Labour already had 270 odd seats in the Commons, had built up and enjoyed consistent strong polling leads (including around 20 points) under Smith, and Kinnock (and to a lesser extent Smith) had already taken some big steps to move the party in the direction he wanted.
I will probably vote labour, but I have never liked Keir Stramer.
He has no core principles beyond getting elected.
We might say the same about Tony Blair, but at least he had charisma and political skills.
There is no excitement over Stramers likely election.
What a pity that Andy Burnham, who is a truly inspirational figure, isn't the leader.
Labour would win a massive majority with Burnham as leader.
then don't vote Labour!
He has one job and that's to get elected.
Unfortunately Starmer's in a political bind owing to our undemocratic FPTP voting system.
He's forced to appeal to just a few deeply conservative ( and big C) , mostly elderly voters in a relatively few contestable seats. They're the lowest common denominator unfortunately and he needs to convince these voters , who essentially have inordinate power, to vote for him or at least not vote Tory.
These are the unfortunate parameters Starmer's got to work within in order to win.
@@MrTimg12 That's not correct. If he were to appeal to disillusioned socialist -leaning Labour (not-anymore) voters in the north, he might not be in the hands of the big Cs. That is a decision he has consciously thrown out. His choice. So no more talk of " he has to act conservative" - if does so, this is bcause he IS a conservative.
He does have more principles than that. However, a lot of the more radical stuff people might want would take too much parliamentary time to finish in the first parliament anyway.
If Starmer is like smith that’s high praise indeed . A marvellous man and so sad he died so young .
Comparing Starmer to John Smith is fatuous indeed. Ditch Starmer and Sunak before it's too late. Follow the example of the truly citizen-centered Dutch coalition or this country's freedoms will be completely lost.
Starmer can't hold a candle to Smith, the fact he is almost "PM elect" is truly scary, I dread to think where this knee taking chancer is going to take our country.
We need to get rid of the Tories. Unfortunately FPTP system doesn't give us much choice.
Let's give Starmer some credit for actually making Labour electable - yup, sadly it's a massive surge to the right. Under FPTP the central ground is where elections are won.
@@MrTimg12 this silly tribal attitude of we must get rid of the Tories at all costs only gives you a Labour government that is to the right of the Tories and totally lacking in integrity and people like you refusing to admit their mistake and defending the lie to the end.
What's your solution then if not to vote in the only party that likely to defenestrate the Tories?
As I've mentioned in this thread owing to FPTP we don't have much choice.
We don't know what Starmer will do once in office so we should at least give him a chance.
Otherwise take the high ground and keep in the Tories.
@@MrTimg12 My solution? Something or someone offering a vision, a real choice to change our country, not someone who's basic selling point is "we are not them" but basically telling us very little of what they really want to do...
We basically have a choice of the status quo from BOTH main parties whether you like it or not.
Thatcher offered a vision and a real choice as did Blair and got electorally rewarded for it big time.
Yes, the tories have been crap, I just find it laughable that were about to vote in with most likely an unassailable landslide a party that hasn't got anywhere near offering us a vision, a future let alone a real Leader.
Leadership requires principles, a strong will, a vision and to be trusted on what he or she says.
Starmer is nothing but a fair weather chancer who's through none of his own positive aspects has found himself on the cusp of power most likely without any significant opposition.
That's not healthy for any democracy least of all ours.
As I say, be careful of what you wish for, you may well not like it!
@@brucehauser6826 The last Labour leader to offer change, and not even particularly radical really, was Jeremy Corbyn.
The rwm immolated him . The plutocrats , their media , their PR , so called 'think tanks and their bought and paid for Tory party went into fifth gear in a campaign that not only impugned Corbyn and his party with anti-Semitism , but rubbished his socio-economic policies that they regarded as ceding too much power, wealth and influence to ordinary working people.
Starmer can't take that chance.
Corbyn proved that there are many people in the country, particularly young people, who are prepared to vote for more fundamental changes to capitalism.
Unfortunately there are myriad reasons why voters, particularly older ones, who don't understand that a more radical reshaping of capitalism is required and they're taken in by the rwm .
This, combined with FPTP , has meant the only way to become electable Labour has had to park its tanks on the centre ground.
Unfortunately radical policies that are required to dismantle 45 years of neoliberalism will not be tolerated by the plutocrats et al.
Hence we get Starmer - indeed, I agree with you, sadly someone who's acceptable to the owners of capital.
They realise that their Tory party has dismantled far too much of the state and it's becoming too obvious that they're walking off with most of the economic pie and the ordinary working person has woken up to the fact that they've been played by the Tories - perhaps.
The plutocrats have given their tacit blessing to Starmer because they realise that for now temporarily the game is up , but he won't come after them just the same as Blair & Brown before him.
Their iron grip on power is still there and this is just a temporary pause before they resume complete control in 5 to 10 years' time.
I'm sure Starmer doesn't like it and nor do we. But this is our so called 'democracy' .
Even now I suspect that most people still don't fully understand the extent to which there has been wholesale transfer of public capital to private capital since Thatcher and its attendant socio-economic issues that are driving the gross inequality that we see today here ( & in the US).
Yup, unfortunately Starmer is Hobson's choice.
Thanks for a wonderful show comparing the two leaders. Would be good if you made a programme about the recent party defections. Just an idea.
Great journalism! Thanks for brightening my day with your insight.
Totally irrelevant commentary from Marr.
John Smith was one of the best prime ministers we never had.
John Smith is the most Labour name you could possibly have.
Was John Smith pro genocide too?
Comparing Starmer with Smith is like comparing fool's gold with the real thing.
I can't remember the late , great John Smith making 10 pledges to win the Leadership then scrapping them all afterwards....
Are you implying John Smith had no moral principles?
John Smith actually believed in making a genuine transformational policy opposite to the Conservatives!
Can you clarify the big state, high tax, high spend, labour right wing tradition. I thought that big state was a left wing phenomena, but I suppose Labour right wing should still be to the left if Tory right wing.
No audio on the Kinnock speech?
John Smith, Nye Bevan, politicians of vision and drive, I don’t see that in modern Labour sadly.
@alanpartridge. You have to remember that those men were dealing with a very different electorate. Today’s voters have been pretty much infantilised - by one means or another.
I haven't voted Labour since John Smith died, the party went with him, I have even visited his birthplace and his grave on the Island of Iona.
I adored John Smith, of course we can never know if he would have been a successful dream leader, we imagined then, but an incalculable loss.
I do hope, and believe, Kier will make a fine PM - but he will have a hell of a difficult situation. No leader can overcome the legendary "Events, dear boy" that blew McMillan out of the water.
We thought we had problems then - HA! They are dwarfed by what is going on now - and that's without the benefits of social media, and AI. Liberal, democratic ideals are under sustained attack, not just Putin's cyberwarfare.
Climate change, (however caused) triggering mass immigration, the rise of the yearning for strong men offering simple but "hard" fixes for these complex, insoluble problems may conspire to drag us all to the abyss...
Dad always called John Smith the Greatest Prime Minister We Never Had. RIP
Fascinating as usual ❤
TWO POINTS:
1) ECONOMIC GROWTH..? So far as this is concerned, when John Smith was Labour leader, the UK was in the EU, including of course the Single Market and the Customs' Union. Regardless of whatever recessions happened, there was an inate economic strength and stability from being in the EU.
Sadly, by contrast, Starmer and Reeves are PRETENDING that we'll have economic growth, whereas in reality unless and until the UK is once more in the EU, there is ZERO possibility of meaningful economic growth. But the Labour leadership dare not admit this in public for fear of losing the forthcoming General Election.
2) TAXATION..? By far the best and most efficient way for a government to gain revenue from taxation is to tax LARGE and MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES - FAR, FAR more than is done in the UK at the present time, but more like the way in which Nordic countries do now.
Sadly, however, Reeves has completely RULED OUT increasing tax on large and multinational companies, which is the ONLY way in which to fund the NHS, State Education, to build the hundreds of thousands of more Council Houses which are so desperately needed, etc.
I cannot see Labour being able to make any meaningful improvement in our dire situation UNLESS large and multinational companies ARE properly taxed.
Unfortunately, the focus always seems to be on individual taxpayers - but this is the LEAST fair and LEAST efficient way for a government to collect tax, and can NEVER hope to pay for all that is needed in order to rebuild a broken economy and nation after 14 years of Tory austerity, cuts, neglect of infrastructure, corruption and gross mismanagement of our economy.
Wealth needs to be taxed as well. For a start capital gains tax can be equalised with income tax.
Yes, John Smith's death was a tragedy for both the Labour Party and the U.K. He was where most voters actually are; slightly to the Left in economic issues, and slightly to the Right in social issues. Blair was a peculiar combination of neo-liberal in domestic issues and neo-Con in foreign policy; together with Margaret Thatcher-a huge admirer of Blair, let's not forget- many of the problems now besetting the U.K. date from the actions of these two clowns.
Blair became a neo-con fellow traveller after 9/11. Hard to forgive or even to understand, but it happened.
But to call him neoliberal is absurd. He introduced the minimum wage, allowed his chancellor to massively boost spending on health and education and introduce a raft of in-work benefits to tackle poverty. He didn't hike taxes up like John Smith had promised to do but then he didn't have to - the economy was doing very well throughout his time as Prime Minister.
@@ChrisWalker-fq7kf You make some interesting points, Chris, but Blair's disastrous legacy does extend to domestic policies as well. He does deserve credit for introducing the minimum wage; although, from accounts published in the intervening years, it seems as if Blair had to be dragged kicking and screaming into supporting it, with an alliance of senior ministers, such as Gordon Brown, insisting upon its implementation. However, with 3 massive majorities, his government did little or nothing to reform the bad practices of British capitalism; the "Light Touch" regulation of banks didn't exactly turn out too well, did it? Also, whatever one's opinion of the levels of immigration set in motion by Blair in 2004, there is no doubt that the UK has not coped with the required huge increase in infrastructure needed by that initial decision. Mrs Thatcher sold off vast swathes of public housing, whilst Anthony Blair encouraged a considerable increase in the UK's population. As a result, house prices and rents have gone through the roof. Well, who would have thought that would happen?
I enjoyed that synopsis. I have been predominantly a conservative voter apart from the early years of Harold Wilson. Politicians, of ability, have a huge attraction to me who are right or left of centre. John Smith was one of those people. Tears were brought to my eyes when the description of his final resting place was described. We, all, only pass this way once, and when commenters are talking of John Smith 30 years after his death, highlighting all his attributes and strengths, it indicates to me the calibre of John Smith. It may be, only, maybe, that I vote for the Labour Party in the forthcoming General Election, for the first time since 1964. That statement is all the more remarkable when I say I lived through the rump months of the Callaghan Government. My message to Keir Starmer is do not let the British People down or you and Labour will be damned for all time. I think I might be just in a position to give you my trust, believe me a trust not given lightly, DO NOT LET ME DOWN.
Vote Labour, trust Starmer and the shadow Cabinet to deliver , their intentions are to SERVE the country and restore our worldwide reputation which has been annihilated over the last 14 years
In 2019 many red wall voters were conned into giving the erTories their vote and once elected the government abused that trust. Labour WILL be careful and cautious in the way it rebuilds the economy to ensure wiring people and businesses that have suffered will be able to afford to live and enjoy a few simple luxuries rather than having to skip even essentials to stay out of debt!
The Neil Kinnock clip is missing its sound!
I heard it, but only in one headphone.
ERM was not a huge failure, it was sheer luck. Otherwise we'd be in the Eurozone. And then forget Bank of England independence, it would be subjugated by German interests
Sorry that statement is an insult to John Smith’s memory!
I just hope we don't lose you Andrew Marr -- you are a national treasure
Good grief.
Please don't arrogantly assume that you know what people think.
“Loathes the silly theatrics!”?? Are you sure? I still remember the awful contribution during the Pincher debacle. I was appalled by Starmer’s “He touched my arse..” quotation in the House. I lost respect for him. He has not recovered it. Play the man and not the ball has been his forever tactic. Britain needs better than this. We will see for sure when the manifestos come out. After “beer and curry gate” and Rayner’s capital gains investigation, will we find that the current “changed” Labour Party is very similar to the SNP in Scotland? Holier than thou, yet just as rotten as those they decry.
John Smith will be turning in his grave watching Starmer and his acceptance of Natalie Elphicke. Marr is a Toraidh Marr
I couldn't agree more.
"High tax, high spending Labour right-winger" - the terms "left wing" and "right wing" have never been more useless. I feel like our politics has moved on since then, because the left/right divide focuses much more on spending than anything else now. There has always been an authoritarian bent to both major parties, but that has little to do with left and right the way we use those words today.
Well said.
The Labour Party without Jeremy Corbyn is like Christianity without Jesus.... And then Adolf Hitler was asked to join....he didn't accept but Elphicke did!!!
Vote for the Citizen Independents!!!
@MrKidOcelot. Corbyn always looked to me like the new supply-teacher who could never find the Gents. Such a waif-like presence in the People’s House. How exactly was he going to deliver us ? He had never fought a battle - bore no scars. Who was he ? His eminence was a total mystery.
@@belindamay8063 That'd be a strawman....your words, your thoughts, your narrative!
The point is that a party that can't be the home of somebody like Corbyn is not The Labour Party anymore!!! Hope you're on script now....
Belinda can and must do better J.C. grade C-
Tories never had economical competence ever
I suppose inviting Elphicke in would be akin to JS allowing Teddy Taylor fro the Monday Club in at their heyday?
I see now why Labour is not saying more about taxing the rich. Either they are too scared to do it for fear of a repeat, or they have no plan to fix the multifaceted problems that obviously would, at least in part, and continually be, solved by greater and fairer taxation and social policy spending.
Its fortunate that there is no real opposition to the idea, except from the literal handful of those, wealthy enough to worry about it.
Erudite and intelligent as ever
So what we are saying is that Starmer would like to tax and spend more but knows he can’t and would like to solve the European problem but can’t. At what point during a Labour administration does he do the Labour thing? Which many of us really want him to do? It’s curious but maybe only the Tories can really ever contemplate taxing more and getting away with it.
I remember that day very well. Overall sadness about John Smith's sudden death. Even on the continent that was the case. How very different Britain is now. Yes, one can get some idea of Smith's parliamentary brilliance in the humour that he used to perfection. Or rather it's perhaps the same decent humanity that one needs to attain. Who wants his or her grave to be on a far flung island anyhow? RIP John Smith
30 years and no change. I am not hopeful.
, the Labour leader has not spoken what he's going to do about the homeless people across England nor has he met or spoke with any homeless person,,, is he going to be a labour leader for the rich and forget about the poor or is he going to be a labour leader for everyone??
Labour and John Smith supported joining the ERM, by the way.
John Smith had integrity - where's the similarity ?
"The Corbyn episode" - Goodness, I had a chuckle!
Why did you chuckle? J.C.'s politics are/were 'spot on''. Sadly he presented a Socialist view with Stormzy at Glastonbury (tickets a small fortune for the rich), rather than winning Red Wall seats. Despite the Daily Fail and Torygraph influence, Corbyn sold out those who believe his words and values. I simply can't understand why anyone/everyone is not angry with him for his failure to understand what most people want - a leader who has the right words and beliefs but makes the effort to look like he could lead. He didn't. He lost. It was 50% his own fault. Time to pick a less left wing Labour who will reduce child poverty just a ;little bit.
The worst Prime minister that Britain never had. " our friends in Hamas "
Starmer & his team are cognisant of the failings of the Blair/ Brown years.
Starmer faces the herculean task of reversing 45 years of neoliberalism.
That's at least a three term task.
We hope the next Prime Minister will act in Great Britain, and on the World stage, with the determination shown by Giants like Attlee and Blair.
Kier Starmer,Labour😂
Correction: there’s a big difference between the two. John Smith had charisma whilst Starmer is Labour’s equivalent to William Hague.
I like William Hague.
John Smith welcomes Natalie Elphicke to a _changed_ Labour Party.
Elphicke says she *hasn't* changed.
We have no idea what Starmer stands for or any policies no mandate he just replies with he his gonna manifest what he wants has prime minister would love to know how he can run a country on this he needs to realise he lives in England not fantasy land
no doubt
I didn’t even know voting they don’t even told me
$1.14 to GB£ now. How much lower? How much failure and inflation coming
The best prime minister we never got to get 😢
Nothing like John Smith !
John Smith asked me to work for him. I could not at the time. He died a year later. I know he would never have lied as Starmer has. He was a politician of Realpolitk. But he was good and honest. Starmer is not. He has destroyed Labour. He would never have stooped so low. He was also far more intelligent with gravitas and honesty at his core.
John Smith wasn't a soulless careerist like Smarmer. The comparison is insulting.
Starmer has no principle and to compare him to John Smith is not the same. It is an insult to the memory of John Smith. John Smith had character, Starmer none
I’m sorry but I’ve expelled bodily materials more charismatic and trustworthy than Keir Starmer
Well done you.
Charisma and trustworthiness can be complete opposites, Boris johnson for example
I'm looking for competence in a political leader - especially after the last five of so called leaders we've been dumped with. This is not a charisma contest.
he's probably more charismatic than you or me seeing as he managed to become leader of a major political party.
I've yet to see evidence Starmer is a Labour supporter...
Labour is there to support Starmer, that's the idea now.
John Smith was a true gentleman ..with integrity and a true statesman....the two things pontificating insufferable Starmer isnt .....
As always. Excellent resume of the shenanigans of politics. Thank you Andrew
At least after Starmer, we can expect another Blair. God help us.
Marr trying to legitimise the vacuous Kier Starmer
Do you want more Tory??
It's Keir 👈.
@@danmorley6517 or more Tory?
You'd rather the bolsjeviks returned and lost another election?
I would gladly pay an extra 1,000 a year in tax if it was invested in our country and saw some improvement to our services.
Really? People see him as different to Fishy Sunak? It no longer makes a difference whether you vote labour or tory
Money is being man contrived for adverse power and control over people. This doesn’t need to happen. I’ll keep praying 🙏💕
John Smith? More like Erich Honecker.
Starmer is no John Smith
John Smith was an honest man of impeccable decency. The complete opposite of this Corporate owned clown.
Keith is a 🤡
Kier starmer is more like the swedish chef in the muppets.