"Analysis", no less:
What did Keir Starmer say in ‘last chance’ speech to save his premiership?
Peter Walker
Senior political correspondent
Address was billed as make-or-break amid mounting speculation of a challenge. Has he done enough to hang on?
Yes, there was a lot of passion, and a lot of talk about fighting on. But the only policy offerings were either not new – a youth experience scheme as part of a reset with the EU – or already effectively the case, as with the announcement that British Steel will be nationalised.
If Starmer sceptics in Labour are to be mollified, there is an argument that he needed to produce a Flemish giant-sized rabbit from his metaphorical hat – something to make them sit up and think: oh, maybe this time things are different. But he did not.
Bloke constantly criticized for not showing passion, shows passion. And it's "yeah, it was only passion".
“I take responsibility for not walking away, not plunging our country into chaos as the Tories did time and again,” he said.
This is an argument that many Labour MPs understand and have some sympathy with. But after such a terrible set of election results, many increasingly feel that even a roll of the dice is better than just hanging on for dear life.
Peter Ohanrahanhanrahan.
‘What I want to do is take a big leap forward with the EU-UK summit this year’
One of the more notable elements of Starmer’s speech was his open acceptance that Brexit had left the UK poorer and less secure, the sort of thing even Labour politicians would have been wary about not long ago.
But what does this actually mean, already-announced policies such as the youth experience scheme aside? Possibly not much. Starmer was asked if he might ever shift on his “red lines”, which would block future membership of the EU’s single market and customs union. The answer was vague, but seemed to indicate not.
Did Ed Davey write this question? Customs Union is bullshit, the idea you can get the very close to the Single Market without freedom of movement. They've been briefing "dynamic alignment", which is something pretty different from before, even if it's harder than it sounds. Has Davey called for that?
Anyway, another example where Starmer was urged to say stuff, he says it, and it doesn't matter anyway. Calling Gaza a genocide would be another example of this, no doubt.
Alas no space in this analysis to stress what is the key point to me- Starmer has his opponents in a snooker here. They can't push him out without excluding the most popular choice to succeed him. So he stays, unless he resigns which he isn't going to.
No space either to make the other obvious point- new leader, with loads of new "radical" policies will be under pressure for a general election immediately, and not without justification.
And no space to address the absence of new policy in the speech. Perhaps there's a King's Speech this week or something.
- By mattomac