Thread 14 Starmer - The Starmeristas Strike Back

[DuncinToffee]

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5224857-thread-13-starmer-facts-are-for-lefties?page=40&reply=141063174

I do not think our PM is going with the easier route.
Have you actually looked at anything the Government have already started@BornFreeButinChains ?
If I were a Con party member I would be ashamed of what they are doing at present.

That is what the panel is for. To listen to the differing views of the survivors and a consensus to be reached. The good thing is, that panel can run in parallel with the implementation of the existing recommendations.

What exactly is it you want Starmer to do?

This an opnion from one of the victims

She wants a government led investigation into Oldham because she feels the council does not have the finances and she is concerned about the independency of any inquiry.

She also says that she feared calls for a wider national inquiry would overshadow what happened in Oldham, and mean survivors "wouldn't get the justice we want".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6232z50365o

Amendment defeated. Ayes 111, noes 364.

Oh wow

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kemi-badenoch-grooming-gangs-donations-b2675934.html

So not even all the Tories voted for their own amendment.

I think that is a fair point. Maybe not government led though, but fully independent, funded by central government. In an ideal world.

Inquiry. Do you just read this stuff from a card???

Actually that is exactly the bit that can't happen. I'm sure Lowe knows that. Nice bit of the red meat there.

I wouldn’t be too concerned @bombastix, this is a poster who was complaining bitterly about these threads and the posters here only yesterday. It’s a bit surprising that they want anything to do with us.

Implementation of the recommendations of the Jay report will be considerably harder than kicking the can down the road by having another inquiry...

I think we should respond with extreme politeness. We should be a veritable hotbed of politeness.

Indeed. I'll settle for politeness - or civil indifference.

Oh I see. It's just people asking for an enquiry aren't going to get much are they!

The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about, I suppose

FFS.

This interesting. Labour quietly doing some good stuff.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqjzj4zrppko

🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳

Is there a reason why Starmer, Rayner and Lammy didn't vote down the amendment ? This is being said on Twitter and I wondered if there was a procedural reason for this.

They could vote to agree with the amendment (Aye) or disagree (No). Or abstain.

They voted NO

What do people on twitter mean with 'voting down'?

It's yank stuff. Amendments are for or against.

Tells you about the nationality of X users

Sorry probably didn't make myself clear. Starmer, Lammy and Rayner are not included in the Hansard list of MPs who voted No.

votes.parliament.uk/votes/commons/division/1900#noes

They possibly thought not voting at all sent a message that the amendment didn’t merit consideration. Their votes weren’t needed to defeat it.

Ah ok, that's a different question and I don't the answer to that.

Maybe because they had the majority? Lib Dems didn't vote either..

That doesn't make sense though if MPs were whipped to vote No - seems odd to me and not good leadership.