[Tubby Isaacs]

On the other hand, Maths. But you're probably right.

[Oboogie]

On the other hand, Maths. But you're probably right.

There's doing what's right and there's winning elections. Taking money from the demographic most likely to vote is not a sound route to winning elections.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Al Carns has said he doesn’t think the investment plan is enough. Sounds like he’ll be gone sometime soon as well.

This is all bad for the Government. I wonder if the Tories had stayed sane if they’d have been in a better position now. Is it really better politics to be banging on about the equalities duty rather than Defence funding? They could provoke a lot of tactical voting by acting like Farage.

[Dalem Lake]

On the other hand, Maths. But you're probably right.

There's doing what's right and there's winning elections. Taking money from the demographic most likely to vote is not a sound route to winning elections.

Thing is, that demographic overwhelming votes Reform or Tory. Labour could double the triple-lock and that group still wouldn't vote for them.

[The Weeping Angel]

I've not seen any politician come out against it.

[Samanfur]

Al Carns has resigned.

[mattomac]

They going run against Starmer?

[Boiler]

Al Carns has resigned.

Oh, FFS...

[mattomac]

I can’t see how a leadership election doesn’t happen in 2026.

I do expect it might be less of a coronation however. Of course what happens next week is going make a massive impact on it.

[Samanfur]

The resignation letter:

[Tubby Isaacs]

This was coming.

You know who wants more money for their department? Everybody. At some point you have to accept this is what you're getting, and get on with the job. I guess they, like George Robertson, think the money just gets taken off somebody else.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Oh, he's put the boot into the Northern Ireland legacy Troubles bill as well. Brilliant. He might as well go and join Kemi.

I'm afraid lots of that letter just reads like somebody who doesn't understand how difficult government is. He's not the first to say that Starmer takes too long to make decisions, so he's probably right about that. But that stuff about politics being broken and people thinking they're working hard and doing badly, that's just populist waffle.

[Abernathy]

Carns seems to be saying that the issue causing him to resign is not just inadequate defence funding, but a general dissatisfaction with Starmer’s government.

This is starting to look like a concerted (perhaps even co-ordinated) effort to pressurise Starmer into quitting in advance of the return of the “King of the North” .

I’m feeling queasy.

[davidjay]

On the other hand, Maths. But you're probably right.

There's doing what's right and there's winning elections. Taking money from the demographic most likely to vote is not a sound route to winning elections.

Thing is, that demographic overwhelming votes Reform or Tory. Labour could double the triple-lock and that group still wouldn't vote for them.

The irony of British politics - the Tories target their core demographic. Labour target the same people.

[Tubby Isaacs]

If so, I think they'd have gone when Streeting and Philips went.

Al Carns sounds genuine if naive. Starmer/ Reeves would be just as justified in asking him if he and Healey if they had supported Defence procurement out, and if so why not? I'm sure Carns would (rightly) point out it wasn't as easy as all that. Same thing applies to being Chancellor.

Heidi Alexander is having to struggle through not having that much money at Transport. The UK's Defence spending by the end of the Parliament will be a bit more than France. If Starmer is failing to provide enough money, he's not the only one. Germany, having for years spent a lot less than us, will be spending 3.5% of the EU's biggest economy on GDP. Is this, in money terms really not sufficient collectively?

[Tubby Isaacs]

As an aside, I liked this comment BTL on The Guardian, replying to a remark by Zoe Williams (who was presumably contractually obliged to take a pop at Starmer in an article about Your Party). The first bit is Williams, the rest by "EarlBerteoni"

"This doesn’t mean the Labour right has it all figured out, far from it. As embodied in Starmerism, it no longer has a political identity except to defeat its own left flank and, in its absence, projects a short-tempered purposelessness that even those with no interest in any aspect of Labour politics can perceive."

A good example of the type of vacuous assertion that has filled the comment columns for the last year or more. Groupthink rules. Starmer’s Labour does, in a more sober analysis, have a political identity, though it takes a bit more effort to define it. How much easier to loftily dismiss it as 'short-tempered purposelessness'.

Labour is attempting a shift towards the needs and priorities of 'ordinary working people'. Worker's rights, renters rights, NHS investment, breakfast clubs, part nationalisation, green transition - all moves in a progressive direction, as are some revisions of taxation. The shift is accompanied by attempts to reform welfare (the cost of which has escalated) and control immigration (which has been politically toxic for many years), also attempting to avoid rupture with the US while moving closer to the EU: these attempts cause understandable disquiet on the left but are not evidence of purposelessness.

Lack of identity, narrative, vision etc are all lazy charges that fail to engage with any of the realities of governing from the starting point Labour inherited or the global chaos they are trying to navigate. Yes, they've made mistakes and backtracked on some of them, and on other aspirations, but that is true of all governments at all times. Yes, there are still positions they hold which are highly questionable. Again, true of all governments.

But given that the key electoral issue for anyone of a progressive disposition is how to avoid a Reform or Reform-led government, you have to ask whether relentless oversimplified and personalised attacks on Labour is the best way to achieve that goal.

This stuff does my head in. Does Williams really not spot the same stuff EarlBertoni does? It's not difficult. You can say it's moving too slowly, raising some of the wrong taxes, doing other things wrong. But there's a plan there. Reminds me (I often say this) of the rightwing attacks on John Major, for allegedly not having the vision and purpose that they thought he should have.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Actually, I'm starting to sympathize with Healey if this crank left hate him this much. Hilariously the article talks about him being a "Russia hawk". Anything that Russia's doing at the moment that might justify that stance? They regard this as "far right".

[Boiler]

There's one canary that needs placing in a coal mine...

[Youngian]

Samantha Niblett is an MP to watch. A brave decision to tell your party and the public to get a grip and grow the fuck up won't win her many friends. People don't really like politicians 'telling it like it is.' Glad she is.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Dan Jarvis is the new Defence Secretary.