[Malcolm Armsteen]

He could resign and then stand for re-election, à la John Major...

[davidjay]

And forever be castigated for lying/hypocrisy/going back on his word.

[Abernathy]

And forever be castigated for lying/hypocrisy/going back on his word.

But he will technically have kept his word by submitting his resignation. As I say, any opprobrium for still being there will be tolerable, if not exactly minimal.

Really no worse than the Trots frothing at the gash because the losing 2019 manifesto is in the bin.

[mattomac]

I’d have my concerns if that happened, the NEC would be right to go behind one particular candidate, I assume that’s probably Cooper or Reeves as nether have been rumoured like Nandy or Streeting.

The PLP would back it bar the cretins on the far left, question is could Labour go into an election with a leader chosen like that, because it might be likely the only option.

If truth be told though, three major policy briefs in 3 days suggests to me that Starmer has avoided it. I expected we would see some movement post the fine, yes the LGBTQ stuff sat nicely going into pride but other stuff could have waited. I hate to tempt fate but I would suggest that it just needs to be made public now. I think it’s the reason the leadership has looked slow to be honest, there seems to be a renewed confidence this past week, I have a feeling that’s probably come out of that.

Isn’t the PCC for Durham a Labour politician. They would know doubt know.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The heart of Starmer’s plan, however, is that the UK must not rejoin the customs union and single market - largely because it would reopen all those emotional arguments about whether the UK should subjugate its product standards and service standards to those of the EU.

And when I asked Starmer whether a single distinguished economist had backed his plan, he deflected and did not answer ...

In a nutshell, Labour’s new Brexit policy is at its heart similar to Johnson’s. It’s Starmer’s recognition that the hard Brexiters have definitively won the argument.

It is only more credible than Johnson’s approach to Brexit if you believe the EU is more likely to give the UK what it wants and needs in the coming years of negotiations if Johnson’s nuclear option of breaching the Brexit treaty and international law is neither wielded or held in reserve.

Robert Peston.

I mean, sure, no "economist" would say that Starmer's plan is ideal. But why do Labour (uniquely) have to pass an economic test on Brexit? I reckon most would say "yeah, this is better than Bozo dicking about with a trade war". See the last paragraph too- how many economists have been asked about Nixonian madman bollocks?

[Tubby Isaacs]

Peston could always speak to people like this. I don't think there's any political route to the Single Market or Customs union from here at the moment.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I think this right. I like Tony Yates a lot, but is he suggesting Labour could run on "live with Brexit"?! That would get absolutely murdered. If they're not going to reverse Brexit- hard to see there's anything like enough support for that- they'd get buried under Johnson/ Penny Mordaunt trade deal optimism.

[Youngian]

Also there is a risk that ‘you said you’d make Brexit work’ gets confronted with the reality that they did not.

Where would the Tory opposition advise Starmer to go from there? My guess is the Tories will have a secret magic Brexit that works but were saving it. And on we go with this absurd farce.

[Crabcakes]

I think most people intelligent enough to not vote for brexit (and many who did vote for it who have since come to the light) will be aware that there has to be a starting point. Steady the ship first, no bold plans that might panic people into propping up a Tory govt., then make the case for what happens next.

[Abernathy]

Some facts :

The EU would not, at the present time, accept an application from the UK to re-join either the EU itself, or just the Single Market. It has been a full two years since the UK ended the transistion period and formally left the EU, and the fact is that the UK has already diverged too far from EU economic and regulatory standards for either to be considered.

Alignment with EU standards is a formal pre-requisite for any future renewal renewal of the UK's EU membership, and David Lammy, and now Keir Starmer, have already outlined that greater alignment with the EU's standards will be the policy of a new Labour government.

It should not be forgotten that whatever Starmer announces now relates specifically to the next election, and the next (hopefully Labour)government. The absolutely overwhelming imperative at that election is evicting the Tories and returning Labour to government. Given that it would be literally impossible for the UK to re-join the EU or its single market during the next government, Starmer is absolutely correct to give a commitment that Labour will not do so.

This does NOT mean that Starmer is now "pro Hard Brexit", or "no different from the Tories" or any of the other idiotic ephithets I've seen being bandied about on social media.

What it does do is clear the way for a future Labour government, having aligned the UK closely with EU standards in its first term, to begin a process that will eventually see the UK's EU membership restored, most probably in a second Labour term of government.

It may not be possible to disarm the Tories for the attacks that they will choose to make against Labour for seeking to re-join the EU, defy the "will of the people", or for not being trusted with Brexit - all potent weapons, as we have seen - but we can spike those particular guns.In the context of the overwhelming objective of removing Johnson's government at the next election, it is absolutely essential.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Excellent. Can I nick it?

[Abernathy]

Of course.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Thank you.

[Youngian]

Events may overtake Keir’s present timid presentation but the Tories will get the bullet anyway.
As May and Johnson didn’t fully understand what the CU and SM are, its probable less than five per cent of Leave voters have the faintest clue. Starmer’s tactics are about neutralising Johnson from shouting ‘immigrants, immigrants, immigrants’ every fucking day until the next GE.

[Oboogie]

@Abernathy
I'd also like permission to plagiarise your excellent post please.

One small correction because you KNOW that pedants WILL pick up on it and use it against you - the UK left the EU on 31 January 2020 but with a transition period that ended on 31 December 2020 which is 18 months ago rather than "two full years".

[Abernathy]

you know how much I admire assiduous pedantry.

[mattomac]

I sadly feel he gets a fine now, god knows what happens then.

When is the current NEC in place till?

[Youngian]

Perhaps what Keir has learned from Johnson’s success is that Tory voters aren’t difficult to hoodwink

[Oboogie]

you know how much I admire assiduous pedantry.

I remember.

[Crabcakes]

I sadly feel he gets a fine now, god knows what happens then.

When is the current NEC in place till?

I’m now pretty convinced he won’t get a fine as the usual suspects are out in force claiming he has already GOT a fine, but also a gagging order preventing anyone saying anything about it until his appeal. Which is exactly the sort of “it’s all a setup and he’s part of the Tory establishment” conspiracy theory horseshit that will give the corbynistas fuel for the next billion years. If he gets off, it’ll be because of the secret appeal and not because he was innocent.

You can never provide evidence that something secret doesn’t exist, so they can run with the idea forever, unhindered by such troublesome issues as facts and reality.