Keir Starmer

[said]

https://fullfact.org/online/keir-sta...-jimmy-savile/

As head of the CPS, it was his duty to personally advise the Police and to manage cases which were highly sensitive.

"Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to advise the police and personally act in cases of importance; an elaboration on the 1856 Act.^{[2]" WICKOPEDIA}

[Desert Region]

As head of the CPS, it was his duty to personally advise the Police and to manage cases which were highly sensitive.

"Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to advise the police and personally act in cases of importance; an elaboration on the 1856 Act.^{[2]" WICKOPEDIA}

Sir Keir's time as the DPP catches the flak no matter what he did!

He only took up the position in November 2008, yet somehow he is meant to carry the burden for the approach of an individual lawyer within a large staff, regards decisions finalised in 2009 but that were regards allegations that had emerged as part of a police investigation that had started before Sir Keir's tenure.

You realise the CPS is said to have a network of close to 10,000 (internal) staff? Sir Keir's not personally responsible for every staff member's decisions. The reviewing lawyer in question re the Saville decision would have been part of one -of over a dozen- regional CPS teams or areas, with each team overseen by a chief crown prosecutor.

Sir Keir commissioned the Levitt review, and acted upon its findings unreservedly. And yet last year he was being blamed for that decision, too!

Paul Gambaccini threatens to run against Keir Starmer over sex abuse ‘witch hunt’

The former BBC radio presenter accused the Labour leadership frontrunner of perpetrating a culture that believed false sex abuse claims

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/pa...ch-hunt-387468


Anyone in such a role as DPP, as Sir Keir was for five years, will unavoidably be blamed and held responsible by people. It's a balancing act that can't possibly keep everyone satisfied.

Look stateside at how Kamala Harris's record as a prosecutor and attorney general (twice) in California was hauled over the coals. She doesn't have a 'perfect' criminal justice record by anyone's reckoning but then no-one could.

[sandGroundZero]

What is the point of Keir Starmer?
After a year, we still don't know


Sir Keir is taking some flak from his own side

Hindsight truly is a fine thing. The last 12 months seem to have confirmed that, while Starmer might be a commentariat’s politician, the general public is rather less enthused.
…“Keir Starmer is a wet wipe” — Moya Lothian-McLean [ex: theguardian.com]

[Hamble]

What is the point of Keir Starmer?
After a year, we still don't know


Sir Keir is taking some flak from his own side

Starmer has nothing to offer.

"The use of so-called vaccine passports to decide whether people can enter pubs would go against the "British instinct", Sir Keir Starmer has said...................

"Labour would look at any government proposals before deciding whether to oppose them, he said."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56598413

[Alikado]

Starmer has nothing to offer.

"The use of so-called vaccine passports to decide whether people can enter pubs would go against the "British instinct", Sir Keir Starmer has said...................

"Labour would look at any government proposals before deciding whether to oppose them, he said."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56598413

Sounds fair enough to me, look at any proposal first, if he said oppose oppose oppose you would be moaning that he was opposing before he knew what it was. I would imagine he thinks it is totally unworkable just as 90% of the country does. No pub landlord is going to turn away custom especially if the pub around the corner doesn't require somebody to show a bit of paper downloaded off the internet or bought off ebay.

[Toodles McGinty]

"Labour would look at any government proposals before deciding whether to oppose them, he said."

I'd say that's quite an improvement on his current 'let's agree with everything' stance.

An opposition that scrutinises the government, then decides upon an action. Exactly what the opposition is supposed to do. Almost a legal obligation, in fact.

Perhaps one of these days he'll delve into real opposition territory and demand an end to the lies, corruption and deep levels of criminality currently being exercised in our Parliament.

Maybe that's hoping for a bit too much. Turn a blind eye. Wave a flag instead.

[Alikado]

I'd say that's quite an improvement on his current 'let's agree with everything' stance.

An opposition that scrutinises the government, then decides upon an action. Exactly what the opposition is supposed to do. Almost a legal obligation, in fact.

Perhaps one of these days he'll delve into real opposition territory and demand an end to the lies, corruption and deep levels of criminality currently being exercised in our Parliament.

Maybe that's hoping for a bit too much. Turn a blind eye. Wave a flag instead.

It is nigh impossible for the opposition in 'times of crisis' they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
They have to go along with 'for the national good' and bide their time which will come, I think they will have plenty of ammunition.

[Toodles McGinty]

It is nigh impossible for the opposition in 'times of crisis' they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
They have to go along with 'for the national good' and bide their time which will come, I think they will have plenty of ammunition.

That's true. Enough ammunition to sink a battleship.

I hope it goes straight to 'criminal investigations' rather than 'inquiries' too.

History does show that the electorate can get it right, especially after times of crisis. For all Churchill was a war hero to the public, they soon came to their senses with Attlee.

[Hamble]

Sounds fair enough to me, look at any proposal first, if he said oppose oppose oppose you would be moaning that he was opposing before he knew what it was. I would imagine he thinks it is totally unworkable just as 90% of the country does. No pub landlord is going to turn away custom especially if the pub around the corner doesn't require somebody to show a bit of paper downloaded off the internet or bought off ebay.

Just remind me of Starmers plan/idea?

"Labour would look at any government proposals before deciding whether to oppose them, he said."

It is a blessing he reads gov proposals before opposing though.

[Hamble]

I'd say that's quite an improvement on his current 'let's agree with everything' stance.

An opposition that scrutinises the government, then decides upon an action. Exactly what the opposition is supposed to do. Almost a legal obligation, in fact.

Perhaps one of these days he'll delve into real opposition territory and demand an end to the lies, corruption and deep levels of criminality currently being exercised in our Parliament.

Maybe that's hoping for a bit too much. Turn a blind eye. Wave a flag instead.

Starmer could come up with an idea to a solution.

[Alikado]

Just remind me of Starmers plan/idea?

"Labour would look at any government proposals before deciding whether to oppose them, he said."

It is a blessing he reads gov proposals before opposing though.

Only a fool would decide their position before looking at any proposal, that is if the Government ever decide , Bojo said never but another day another position.

[Toodles McGinty]

Starmer could come up with an idea to a solution.

You'd hope so.

So far, I'm not so sure.

Although Ali is correct, damned if they do, damned if they don't right now.

I suppose we have to wait and see. You'd hope the barrister in him would at least be planning a long game, even if he isn't letting us in on it.

You know how it will go. Come election year, the promises will be flying from all sides. The more things change, the more they stay the same, and all that.

[local]

Must be quite galling for Labour supporters who I remember telling us how Starmer the Lawyer would make mincemeat of Boris.

He has failed but its probably as much about his terrible shadow cabinet.

Still plenty of time to dump them and start again.

He reminds me of Gordon Brown clever and capable but a pretty hopeless leader.

[sandGroundZero]

4612-020421_TOUGHSTARMER
© Steve Bell

[Desert Region]

Must be quite galling for Labour supporters who I remember telling us how Starmer the Lawyer would make mincemeat of Boris.

He has failed but its probably as much about his terrible shadow cabinet.

Still plenty of time to dump them and start again.

He reminds me of Gordon Brown clever and capable but a pretty hopeless leader.

I expected him to have done better than he has so far, but I think it would be premature to give up on him, especially as there doesn't appear to be an obviously better alternative to him, whereas, in a contrast with the Tories, Johnson was always a better alternative to the useless May.

Add to this that Starmer's performing the fairly thankless undertaking of ridding his party of the toxic influence and legacy of Corbyn, and the earlier he gets at that the better.

Also, he was a bit unfortunate to keep on needing to self-isolate, plus much of his long-game strategy and approach re Johnson was predicated on the basis that the Government was making a consistent mess of handling the pandemic response, which it was, and that come 2021 and beyond the Tory's catalogue of failures would be extracting a high political price for them, which Labour could then take them to task for.

What he didn't reckon for was that the UK's vaccine strategy would transpire to prove a success, while the EU's vaccine strategy would transpire to prove a relative failure.

He has been lacklustre, but his strategy was mainly undone by unpredictable and fundamental circumstance changes outside of his control.