Time for a new PM and Chancellor?

[Whenwillitgetwarm]

I wrote this on another thread but feel it should have its own thread.

Although I voted Labour (the current Tory’s are too insane), I think it may be time to swap out Starmer and Reeves. If this is done early, there’s enough parliament time left to bed a new PM and Chancellor in.

They both lack ideas, seem confused, no vision etc. They had 14 years to think up workable plans. Coming in and throwing their hands up saying there’s no money so they can’t do anything is very poor. They want to continue austerity on the sly. They indulge in stupid culture wars like VAT to rob Peter to pay Paul (and Paul won’t see a penny anyway). They have bad advisors and are arrogant. It looks like they are just excited to have the job titles and don’t know what to do.

Get a top two who will come up with a bold plan. We’re in the gutter so there’s opportunities to deliver quick wins. They don’t always need funding, simple policy changes can make big and quick differences. If they gave each department a target to deliver one quick legislative win by Christmas, we’d start 2025 differently.

Unfortunately we’re stuck with two people who can’t believe their luck, and who are afraid of the Daily Mail, Murdoch, some loud Redwall types and bots on X who wish our country economic harm. They are weak.

If Labour were a football team, there would be fans screaming for Starmer to be sacked now.

This is not about getting rid of Labour. I believe there is talent in the wider party, much more than in the Conservatives who hollowed out their party under Johnson. Nevertheless I just don’t think Starmer and Reeves should have their roles.

Am amazed you expected anything different

It was blindingly obvious Starmer was no leader, and the party had no ideas before the election.

I have to say, "Am I correct in assuming you're not a pensioner and won't be affected by the budget" doesn't come across as making any sense if that person knows you are a pensioner.

It just makes that person look like an idiot when it turns out you are a pensioner.

And then backtracking and pretending it was some sort of gag doesn't work either.

My conscience doesn’t need pricking, thank you. My vote was made in the full knowledge that I’m likely to pay more tax and am happy to do so. My fellow man and woman include kids in families impoverished by the two child benefit cap, not pensioners as comfortably off as I am whinging about losing money they don’t need.

It's always striking its the women and black or brown people singled out for criticism.

Personally I find Nandy, Rayner and Lammy all credible, intelligent people. Even where I disagree with their politics.

Certainly more credible than any of the Tories leadership candidates.

What is it about Starmer taking a divided party which was widely expected to be out of power for at least another decade to the party of government in 4 years made you think he wasn’t a leader?

People don’t have to like them or their policies, but this ‘incompetent’ , ‘poor leader’, ‘floundering’ stuff is nonsense.

No, if anything it just made me think that they're merely on the side of wealthy pensioners who want to moan about losing some money.

Or that they have no idea what poverty actually looks like.

It seems apparent from this thread that some on here can't tell what it looks like (or at least doesn't look like).

As you’re so comfortably off Blossomtoes why didn’t you contribute to food banks for those families struggling with a two child benefit cap rather than vote in a party which is worsening the housing stock situation and making businesses reluctant to take on new employees? How is that helping the country?
When you and I were born there was no child benefit for the first child.

That’s not how it works.

I live in a 3 bed, well 2.5 bed, 1930s house that is probably worth about £270k-£300k, not extended and my dining room is probably just under 4m by just over 4m, it's one of those knocked through to the lounge type houses, lounge is about the same size. if I got rid of my sideboard a piano could sit there instead.

There never was one, true. But I don’t think Labour ever said anything that, taken without trying to misinterpret, meant they thought there was one.

And of course Tories kept finding magic money trees for their mates.

I don’t think I’m blinded to the potential faults of this govt, or to the faults of past Labour governments, but I think her comment was a bit disingenuous albeit true.

I can totally understand when potentially good politicians are put off going into politics. Who would want that level of scrutiny and danger. I was raging when Greenpeace carried out a stunt at Rishi Sunaks private residence. Totally unacceptable- if we want good candidates to go into politics we need to protect them. I think the current crop of politicians (of any party) are very poor, I don't see any statesmen or women. For the poster who said she could see Rayner as a leader, I shudder at the prospect. Yes, she's representing the working class but she neither has the intelligence or leadership qualities of a PM - she's no Angela Merkel.

So now you're assuming that @blossomtoes doesn't donate to food banks... Bet you're wrong about that too.

And by the way, it's perfectly possible to donate to food banks AND vote Labour, that's a weird zero sum take on life.

I agree.

I find those three very credible.

I’m particularly impressed by Lammy as a foreign Secretary even though I disagree with him about some issues relating to trans people, for example. And he’s very experienced and credible, despite the totally baseless claims to the contrary. He also very clearly understands the situation the world is in right now and takes threats seriously.

I have direct debit to my local food bank. Try harder.

I agree - lots of people in small houses have pianos. Lots of musicians can place a much lower value on other material goods save for those used to make music.

Totally ridiculous. We need stability.

Oh dear.

I totally disagree with you on Lammy. He's no Foreign Secretary, watch Sir Malcolm Rifkind's interview on Sky News. There you will see the insight and eloquence we need in the role.

The advert has been online coming up 24 hours now and eagle-eyed observers have noted a multitude of different possessions which could be sold to raise the £200 shortfall and pay to heat their home this winter

It's a complete own goal and curious that you are still insisting it's a good advert for the tory party against all evidence to the contrary

Oh, but she has room for a piano and a sideboard. I don't see how you can possibly look at that room and think it is the room of someone struggling for space. Or money, tbh.

This is not a person who is living in a one-bed flat, as suggested upthread.

Will never happen - Labour never ditch their leaders even when they’re toxic and unpopular. We’re stuck with Starmer until he loses an election.

A shame for those of us who think his treatment of women, pensioners and callous disregard for people’s safety re euthanasia, are a disgrace.

How do you know what she did or didn't contribute to?

I agree with you on Lammy, but also the other two mentioned in pp are in same bracket as him

It’s amusing really, isn’t it? The assumption that everyone of a certain age is as greedy and self serving as oneself. And then castigating them when they’re not.

Oh don't be silly, OP.