Did Rachel Reeves change anyone's mind re Labour?

Sleekit. Love that word. As we would say - he's a shleeveen.

I actually hope the Tras go for him now. He just reinvents it all as he goes along.

Look what happened inside the Tories. The TRAs were incredibly powerful 6 years back. Now they are broken, and part of that is down to women activists inside the party being clever, ruthless and advancing at all costs

Is it? Which ones specifically?

The pressure came from outside the parliamentary party, with support from a few brave women inside, most of whom were established from way before the TRA movement, so were relatively secure and able to speak out.

It's total fantasy to suggest that there was some secret GC resistance that infiltrated the Tories and gained power in a mysterious and invisible soft coup. Unless you think that the Baroness has been a GC sleeper agent who cunningly anticipated the rise of the TRAs when she first stood for the Tories in 1979?

This argument is just another variant on Labour's favourite "Pipe down, Women - it will be your turn soon, if you shut up and do as you're told".

The letter from Starmer is weighted to trans people. 3 paragraphs versus one for women. Nah this is a con to give people hope, but it doesn't actually say much at all and what it does say is all about trans issues not women's.

I was listening to a programme about her in Radio 4 tonight and thought how impressive she sounds.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001k7lw

It seems difficult to believe she wouldn’t see sense if she thought about the problems properly, but I not sure that she does.

I don’t think she is part of Labour Women’s Declaration is she?

What has this got to do with Rachel Reeves and gender?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11854497/SVB-hired-woke-board-obsessed-diversity-invested-5BN-healthier-planet.html

“The banks that collapsed was due to diversity hires” - this is news to me @LittleFingerStrength. Do you have any links?

Off topic, but Europe's oldest ever head of government, Konrad Adenauer, was 73 when he was elected as the first Chancellor of West Germany (FRG). Re-elected several times, he stayed in office until resigning aged 87. (He remained head of the governing CDU, which he co-founded, until his retirement at 90 and was serving as a Member of the Bundestag for Bonn when he died at the age of 91 in 1967.) He was a very shrewd political operator in West Germany's turbulent formative years during the Cold War and instrumental in the rebuilding of Germany's economy from the ashes of its destruction at the end of WWII, helped co-found what is now the EU, strengthened NATO, and built strong ties with France and Israel despite the enormous post-war mistrust of Germany arising from the recent Nazi era.

(Although the leader of the British zone of occupation had dismissed Adenauer from his position as Mayor of Cologne for "incompetence" before the FRG was formed, it was Adenauer's resentment at being treated as less than an equal of the British political administrators that was behind the move. His treatment by the British played a role in his subsequent election as Chancellor, which was a serious embarrassment for them.)

I don’t think it’s an “old guy” problem with Starmer (if you think 60 is old!). From what one hears, it is the fact that he has a lot of advisers who are male and in the 30-45 age bracket. Lots of woke misogyny in that particular demographic, IMV.

I don't think age has anything to do with it. Biden is obviously senile. But Churchill was perfectly functional.

In fact I think the longer you are in the tooth the better a politician because you have wisdom and can see the big picture. My own theory about the moral and intellectual decline of the Labour party is that there are no sensible elders. All the leaders that made Labour electable and able to reach a wide electorate - Philip Gould, Mo Mowlam, Robin Cook - all died young. Brown/Blair burnt their legacy and authority. And Momentum/blue haired students filled the gap.

Who's offended?

Football is hardly comparable.

He is an old Granddad type to me, lots of people were called OAPs at his age, many retired at his age. Many footballers retire before 40. It's my opinion that politics and some jobs are too taxing for some and as we age there is deline, if you are offended then that's for you to ask yourself why.

Yes, only the Tories didn't whip their MSPs.

old Granddad types like Starmer and Biden are making poor political decisions. I think politicians should be limited to something like 30-60 years old.

Starmer is 60 - a generation down from Biden, and hardly an 'old granddad' type. Though I don't dispute the 'poor decisions' part.

Damn right they will. They will do what Ireland did and attach self-id to a seemingly reasonable law (conversion therapy ban, full decrim of abortion or something similar) and slide it in that way so that if you object you are a homophobe, misogynist or bigot or right wing anti-abortionist.

It makes me despair that women are grateful for a few crumbs any politician throws their way. This goes for both tories and labour. Have some standards and hold these people to account. Learn from our enemies and lobby across all parties. This isn't about who to vote for - it comes way earlier than that.

The risk now isnt that law can be passed without public awareness, its that they can be hidden, or wording can subtlety change.

Like anti trans conversion therapy added to anti gay conversation thearpy legislation, when the two are not the same.

Also, any misogyny hate speach laws may include 'transwomen' in the definition of misogyny.

but we'll be barging ahead with it as quietly as possible if we get into power.

I think the days of these laws being passed quietly are long gone. But I think you’re right that they’ll barge ahead regardless.

I don't think labour realise they are compromising with womens rights in what appears to be secret backroom deals?

It appears to me that they are trying to keep tra happy, but not wanting to be honest or open about what they plan to do. If they are proud of the policies and think that they are fair, why be vague?

I dont think the conservatives are doing well here, but they didnt write the GRA and the EqA. I really dont trust labour to come up with policies to fix the problems they created when they havent demonstrated that the understand the issues.

I was all for equality and representation of each group, it needs boundaries.

I am no longer keen on old/young people running things in certain instances, for example, guidance, policy and political parties or diversity hires and too many of certain groups bejng over represented whilst other groups are under represented.

The banks that collapsed was due to diversity hires rather than the best person for the job being employed.

Too many young people in publishing, politics are pushing pure nonsense and old Granddad types like Starmer and Biden are making poor political decisions. I think politicians should be limited to something like 30-60 years old.

People used to retire from certain professions earlier, such as sports then have a second career, the same should happen in certain brain taxing professions like politics and safeguarding.

GRA reform not a priority = we won't put it in the manifesto or talk about it in the campaign if we can avoid doing so, because we don't want to draw the public's attention to it, but we'll be barging ahead with it as quietly as possible if we get into power.

@ZuttZeVootEeeVo - I totally agree.

But for a long time he has happily pottered along unchallenged saying “we will modernise/update/reform the GRA” allowing TRAs to assume it meant self-ID. Now suddenly he wants to clarify that, or try out a clarification with female constituents. My entirely cynical view is that they may have landed on that as a “compromise” short of self-ID.

Worth noting what Scottish Labour did when it came to the GRR bill in Scotland:

Made lots of noises about listening to women and fixing the issues.

Put up a load of amendments that all got voted down.

Voted for the bloody thing anyway. In fact, were whipped to do so, iirc.

he comes closer than he ever has in public to saying what “modernising” the GRA means (ending the spousal veto, seemingly). And he gave an interview about a week ago saying that GRA reform was not a priority.

This just demonstrates to me that labour just dont understand the problem with the GRA. They continue to prioritise the wants of the (lets face it) male yrans people, over the women who are likely to be the victims of the policies.

Should say - its starmer ignoring inevitable consequences.