Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Starmer’s “pledge “ to “unite the party” is a fine example of how, for the most part, Jones and his fellow Trots are talking absolute bollocks. Why? Because you can only unite those willing to be united. The Trots simply are not, never were, and never will be. In terms of the non-crank majority of the party, Starmer has indeed successfully united them behind the drive to win the election. Even John McDonnell has recently shown some surprising signs of seeing sense.

Starmer’s not really done much that wasn’t necessary to get the EHRC off the party’s back and to deny easy hits to the government over Corbyn.

The answer he needs to give is that the manifesto will be something people can unite around. The pledges thing is a nuisance and he made a rod for his own back there. He didn’t have any need to promise lots of that stuff.

Oi, Sir Keir! How come you're allowing some trees to be cut down? Use that MP's veto you have (or something). One genius BTL thinks that Sadiq Khan should stop it.

Do you remember Euston being full of trees? Me neither. But I do remember crossing Euston Road being really shit.

I never even noticed trees on the Euston Road.

What is Keir Starmer doing for his constituents in "one of the most polluted areas in Europe"? *

Literally the first story when I searched "Keir Starmer ULEZ"

'We have a massive air pollution problem': Sir Keir Starmer supports ULEZ expansion to ‘entirety of Greater London’

So it would appear he is supporting a policy that has significantly improved air quality for millions while our chum on Twitter is mithering about a few trees.

* This is obviously bollocks. https://www.statista.com/statistics/122 ... in-europe/

It's good old "Say something about Nicaragua!" territory.

There’s a massive group of “tree cut down! disgrace!” people BTL on the Guardian and Twitter. Most of them seem genuine but doubtless some Petrolhead people are egging it on.

I’m slightly concerned about how Starmer will credibly be able to hold to his line that there is no case for the UK to re-join the Single Market and/or Customs Union, now that Sunak appears to have waxed lyrical about how Single Market access is highly desirable, at least for one part of the UK.

I’ll be very interested to see how he pulls it off, if he does.

Not that difficult. Northern Ireland special case and all that. We heard a fair bit about Northern Ireland powering ahead before, but less recently. I wouldn't be surprised if growth wasn't that different between NI and GB.

Abernathy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 7:19 pm I’m slightly concerned about how Starmer will credibly be able to hold to his line that there is no case for the UK to re-join the Single Market and/or Customs Union, now that Sunak appears to have waxed lyrical about how Single Market access is highly desirable, at least for one part of the UK.

I’ll be very interested to see how he pulls it off, if he does.

Has he said that? I thought he had been very lawyerly and just bsaid there was no cause to rejoin the EU, not get into a closer trading relationship.

He's said that there's no political case* to join the SM & CU which is currently true.

* as opposed to the economic case which is indisputable.

He was asked about the economic case too.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ir-starmer

Asked if he thought single market membership would benefit UK growth, the Labour leader told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Monday: “No, at this stage I don’t think it would, and there’s no case for going back to the EU or going back into the single market. I do think there’s a case for a better Brexit. I do think there’s a very good case for making Brexit work.”

The difference with NI, of course, is that the de facto Single Market membership has happened without freedom of movement, which may not be all that popular yet.

I am pretty good on periods and schools of furniture, and also clocks once we get in to the late 18th century, but I know just how difficult ceramics can be. Ming vase or poisoned chalice? Buggered if I know...

Here are the tress at Euston shamefully left to their fate by Sir Keir and Sadiq Khan.

HS2 doesn't cost £1bn per mile either. Complete lie.

They're fucking trees. Wood. You can plant some more...

In fairness, there were more trees there than I can remember now I look at older photos, but the green space wasn't very nice- not least because it was between a railway station and one of London's busiest roads. I think we can safely say goodbye to that if we get much better mass transit in return.

Just a hunch here, but I reckon some trees may have been cut down when the railways into Euston and the tube line into Euston Square were built...

.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 5:57 pm Here are the tress at Euston shamefully left to their fate by Sir Keir and Sadiq Khan.

HS2 doesn't cost £1bn per mile either. Complete lie.

Absolute performative nonsense.

That tree has been there about 15 years...

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 12:37 pm That tree has been there about 15 years...

Some of the trees in older pictures look like they were planted earlier (Victorians apparently planted a lot of them). There are loads more trees just down Euston Road. So, unless people are planning on standing in that particular spot (why?) pedestrians walking down the road will probably be OK with all these life saving trees about.