The reshuffle, thought to have been deftly managed by Sue Gray, made a shadow cabinet heavy with stalwarts from the Blair-Brown era


I don’t know about other people but I really was hoping for more than a sequel to the Blair years. I mean I get they need experience but the Tories are on the ropes, the Centrists in the party have had 13 years to come up with new ideas…

  • Bernie Ecclestoned@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    This is just not scaring the horses, the Tories are kicking themselves in the balls so hard as their policies come home to roost, it’s not the time to be radical.

    Boring and effective is the way to power. Everyone’s had enough of psychodrama politics.

    • Serdan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      When is the time to be radical, then? Is it when the opposition is in a strong position?

      • HipPriest@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Obviously not. But most of the floating voters labour is trying to attract aren’t radicals they just know they want something better.

        I, personally, do not think that after dropping the tax on the top 5% on earners (the main frightened the horses policy) it was also necessary to drop the workers rights and ending 2 child limit on benefits.

        They’ve also give cold on green policies by the sounds of it. I mean at some point you’ve got to differentiate yourself

        • Bernie Ecclestoned@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I think they are keeping their powder dry and hoping the economy can be projected to show enough growth to ‘justify’ the spend come election time.

          • frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Agree. In fact, whether it grows or not, they’re hoping to have the political capital to adjust the fiscal rules or fudge the numbers to make them fit the rules. The latter being exactly what Brown did as Chancellor!

    • Alchemy@lemmy.team
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      At this point all Labour need to do is show even mild competence and they’ll probably win.

      Also they’re not in-fighting and back stabbing each other like the tories are, which is another win!

    • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s never the time to be radical, we must always put the rich first no matter what. Helping the majority of the nation live decent lives is something that will just have to wait until we’re all dead and buried, it really is the only way, all the billionaire owned media agrees.

      • frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        Things did get better for the majority of the nation under previous Labour governments. It wasn’t perfect by any stretch, but if your criterion for good governance is ‘helping the majority of the nation live decent lives’, which I agree is a noble goal, Labour’s track record shows they’re the party to vote for.

    • G4Z
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The world is literally burning up due to man made climate change and we have highest most obscene inequality since the war and this isn’t the time to be radical?

    • HipPriest@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Sure I get that. And I want them in power. But I’m slightly concerned they’re going to be so boring as to not be effective - ie be so concerned to not rock the boat they’ll enable the status quo to more or less continue

      I’ve been concerned to see the amount of policies they’ve rowed back on recently. I totally understand they don’t want to scare the horses but at the same time it’s not like Starmer is Corbyn is it?