To think Starmer is starting to show some original ideas?

[CurseOfBigness]

“He pledges to set up a publicly-owned green energy company within a year if he is elected, with 100% clean power by 2030”

Sounds enterprising and different to the bog standard ‘we’re going to nationalise everything’. There’s agency with it being green energy and good for the environment. Sounds more like responsible nationalisation…

“He says the war in Ukraine was the spark that caused rising energy costs, but that the country was not in a position to deal with it.”

And that’s insightful. Sounds like he’s thought something through.

Being reported Live from Labour conference: www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-63042145

P.S. I’m a centric voter who swings and sways depending on what’s going on at the time and what’s on offer etc.
Right now, I do not like Truss’ government because she seems irresponsible (dodging the OBR report for the mini budget with semantics) and she just doesn’t care…
Labour as the obvious opposition but there are other options. This is the first time in a while I’ve seen Starmer present a fresh new idea…

Does that mean more heed should be paid to ideas put forwards by the next generation?

If an idea is great, then why are you suggesting the age of the inventor matters?

Ten Kid Inventors Who Changed Our Lives

An adult who listens to a child’s idea and recognised its potential for success is open minded… better than an adult who dismisses anything put forward by a kid because “children can’t possibly have better ideas than adults”.

So impressive, he can’t decide whether women or men are the cervix havers.

I like positivity but I don’t understand the point. We already have producers who produce renewable energy and suppliers who say to their customers that they just sell renewable energy (all electricity is intermingled in the grid so presumably they are just buying supplied renewables.

I don’t see how a publicly owned renewable energy company would help. Private industry tends to innovate better anyway. Sounds like more expensive diversionary projects to me.

It is bizarre you’ve accused me of being Labour PR…

As far as I can see. The conservatives have been in power for the past 12 years and the women’s rights you’re talking about have been eroded in that time. Self ID was brought under Teresa May…

I hadn’t read or heard about Labour sidelining women at the conference as you’ve just suggested. But I have googled your claim.

Labour accused of ‘silencing’ women in row over sex-based rights group: Party denies ‘gender-critical’ group’s claims that refusal of a conference stand was a ‘political judgment’

Give me some time to read up on this from various sources before formulating a fair view based on the facts.

Also wasn’t he director of public prosecutions when the Rotherham Grooming Gang were operating with the knowledge of the labour council and police because they were too scared of being called racists. I can see a parallel now where Keir is too scared to be called a transphobe.

Ah that’s where we we’ve been going wrong. Not listening to 10 year olds to make economic and public policy. Nothing to do with having a completely mediocre political class. Even mediocre is being generous to them. The bar is so low, they’re tripping over it.

This. Labour is losing a lot of womens votes by aligning with mens rights activists.

This….As a life long Labour supporter I couldn’t vote for Starmer and his ilk.

This does appear to be a theme. I’ll do the hashtag search suggested upthread about Labour losing women’s votes. Probe the claims further…

I think your post says it all really, Starmer the Tory lite.

This. Labour need to stop attacking women in this way. They can’t just expect to get our votes as being the best of a bad bunch. It’s disgraceful that they are so happy to throw away womens rights just to appease a few noisy men.

This in spades !

Yes, but to be honest, I'm starting to eye roll all the people moaning about how they find Starmer boooorrrriinnng.

Looking at Truss and her merry men, we are seeing British governance rapidly veering towards banana republic territory. We're in danger of making our country into a laughing stock.

We need a reasonably OK, normal, non-weirdo COMPETANT person as PM. Starmer fits the bill. I don't care whether he's exciting or not.

It’s all over Twitter, they’ve got pictures of the empty stands at labour conference that they were denied were not the only ones refused a Stall at Labour Conference, Feminist Charity Filia & LGBAlliance, for the second year running, were also refused. #LabourLosingWomen t.co/EoTIHJRp6B The tweets

Loved his speech... all we need now is an election!

Blah blah gender critical rubbish

Thank you!

And you don't give a shit about the new Italian pm being a far right lunatic

@Fishandchipsupper Why are you surprised I’m treating your claims with scepticism?!

You’ve outright accused me of being Labour media PR (and I’m definitely not!). How can I trust your credibility?

I sense emotions are running high for you.

I have in the past made errors of judgement about things when matters are emotive. Of course women’s rights matter to me (I’m a woman and I’m very well read on suffragette history). That’s why I want to do some reading about your claims and give them a fair balance - this means credibility too.

I imagine you want to be fair as well?

So… Boris Johnson seems to be the source of the line that Starmer “struggled to define what a woman was”.

I want to probe this. Firstly, Is this true? Also, has Boris defined what a woman was? What’s really going on here?

I want the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Surely you do too?

^fair hearing

If it comes as any comfort, you are most definitely not alone!
I'm a LP member, very unusually married to a dyed in the wool Tory voter.
DH has been utterly dismayed at the Tory Party over the past 5 years, and is beginning to look favourably towards Starmer as a very viable option.
Perhaps more interestingly, one of my closest friends is (was) a Tory party staffer. We've had the most illustrious political conversations over the years - and, since Truss took office, she has downed tools and is also listening to Starmer with interest.

Before anyone else says it, I do very much acknowledge that there is a conversation to be had amongst the Labour Party on the back of the sheer number of right-of-centre voters beginning to infiltrate the ranks. It does raise genuine questions about what we really stand for.
Left wing purists would say that there's no place within Labour for either my husband or my friend, and that "Tories = Bad".
I don't subscribe to that. I don't buy into political extremism. I think the Labour Party can be big enough to accommodate a broadchurch of ideas, and that we can stand for creating an equality of opportunity in a way that the Tory Party can't, because it's not within their ideology to do so.

I think there's a bit of excitement around Labour at the moment, and we've seen some pretty progressive policies coming through from the conference.
Lots of the Starmer critics have slated him for being lacking in clear policy, and for failing to offer up a strong opposition. I was one of those critics - but he's been brilliant this conference, and I really hope that he can ride the bounce in the polls and be the unifying leader that this country needs.

Yet again this blatant Labour PR thread is failing to listen to women

Speak for yourself. Many women on this thread and others have said that the TWAW issue is way down the list of issues compared to the way current government policy is affecting women.

I would be interested to see polling which shows this would be an issue in deciding votes in an election. Voters will be prioritising the economy, cost of living, health care. I would expect environmental issues to be considered more important than trans issues among the wider electorate.