Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think we don’t know how lucky we are under Starmer.

404 replies

SevenYellowHammers · 11/05/2026 19:50

Russia have a mad despot who is responsible for the deaths of Russians and Ukrainians and has caused untold damage on the world’s environment and economy. But he’s still in power.

The USA have a mad despot who’s causing deaths worldwide and has started a war he can’t win causing untold damage to the world’s economy and environment. But he’s still in power.

Israel have a mad despot who is committing genocide and putting Jewish people at risk across the world. But he’s still in power.

In the UK, we have a dull bloke who’s doing his best to stand up to the mad despots while not leading us into war. And we’re all trying to get rid of him.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
Slightyamusedandsilly · 14/05/2026 07:07

GenialHarrietGrouty · 14/05/2026 00:10

I'm seriously disappointed in those members of the Labour Party who are trying to force him out. It feels very much as if they are pandering to media pressure, and all the media are interested in is getting an easy headline - they seem to be desperate for something new all the time. It's insane to consider going down the Tory path of changing Prime Ministers at ridiculously short intervals. It's very normal for sitting governments to do badly in mid-term polls and we've never had these ridiculous panics about the leader when it has happened in the past.

I don't think everything he has done is perfect, and in particular he needs to take a long hard look at how many very angry parents of children with SEN and disabilities voted against Labour as a direct result of Phillipson's SEND White Paper proposals. But that demonstrates that it is policies that they should be reconsidering, not people (though booting Phillipson wouldn't be a bad idea, actually}. If they're worried about their prospects in the next election, then they need to get it through their heads that they don't have any candidates amongst their MPs that the electorate will find any more attractive. Wes Streeting in particular simply doesn't have the personality to draw the votes in, and I don't think that people like Miliband or Reeves cut it either.

I agree totally with that. I think they're power hungry and so engaged in bloody battle that they've forgotten they're there to represent the populace. It should be an 'off with their heads' moment really.

They need to get their heads down and earn their wage representing us. NOT infighting.

Slightyamusedandsilly · 14/05/2026 07:08

the80sweregreat · 13/05/2026 21:53

I liked Ritchie Sunak and I’ve never voted conservative. It’s a shame he came in so late. They should have chosen him over Liz Truss really, but that’s one for political pundits and the professionals to ponder why they didn’t. He did well at the hustings and was competent. They really did get it so wrong.

Same here. Do you remember the media during the Truss / Sunak battle?

Anyone that thinks the media isn't biased should have CLEARLY had it signposted to them then that the media drove the choice of Lettuce Truss. Sunak was barely mentioned.

JennyForeigner · 14/05/2026 07:09

It fills me with despair. The Labour Left are pathetic - grievance filled little men pining for Corbyn and the days everyone told them they were important, and the self-interested prats in regional mayoralties who think they are Che Guevara.

I am holding on to the hope that Wes Streeting is pushing the timing to keep the dreadful Burnham out. If the best the left has is Miliband, they've fucked it, Starmer wins on a ballot and they have to simmer the fuck down before the economy flatlines forever.

MushMonster · 14/05/2026 07:13

HeadofAudiology · 13/05/2026 23:41

I see what you mean. After all since your "calm and measured" PM took over, we've seen no scandals at all.

No corrupt anti-corruption ministers, no fraudsters appointed to ministerial positions, no deputy PMs dodging paying tax, no ministers or MPs lying about being "economists" or "lawyers" on their CVs, no one hoping old ladies who won't vote for them will be dead by the next GE, no drunken MPs kicking the shit out of constituents in the street, no ministers with greedy snouts snuffling in Lord Ali's trough...

...and, most importantly of all, your "calm and measured" PM has never appointed a twice previously sacked, sleazy friend of the world's most notorious paedophile to the most important international diplomatic position in government, especially not one who had previously leaked state secrets to his sleazy, paedophile friend and also to China and Russia. No, no, no.

Hold on a minute...

May I add the unrecorded meeting with Palantir, with Mandelson by his side?
That never happened either. Not in paper, for sure. And that is a breach of Ministerial Code.
And that said company is linked to Mandelson via another company where Mandelson holds shares.
And that said company has secured large contracts with UK NHS and other sectors in UK.
Palantir has a really bad press. I do not know if the contract for the NHS database, and other parts of government, are any good. If the systems work nicely and make our lives better, and they are save enough to be trusted with our data. It would be good to hear from NHS personnel that uses them. But it all sounds dodgy. Very dodgy.
Also, in view of the current international stage affairs, should we just give up on the special relationship with US? It is not there anymore, it is gone. And a UK own software will keep more jobs in UK, investment in UK (there, for Reeves growth, it will add a bit) and keep us safer. If UK creates its own system, for the NHS and, particularly, defence. Domestic companies for software and weapons make 100% sense in the current cyberattack and hostile world we live in. Plus they will add to our wealth generation pool, instead of seeing millions going outside the UK.
Why choose an American company? And be stupid enough to not follow all protocols and have it all properly recorded?

MushMonster · 14/05/2026 07:36

Oh, Angela Rayner has just been cleared by HMRC. She has paid the stamp duty she was due, but that is all.

poetryandwine · 14/05/2026 07:45

HeadofAudiology · 13/05/2026 23:41

I see what you mean. After all since your "calm and measured" PM took over, we've seen no scandals at all.

No corrupt anti-corruption ministers, no fraudsters appointed to ministerial positions, no deputy PMs dodging paying tax, no ministers or MPs lying about being "economists" or "lawyers" on their CVs, no one hoping old ladies who won't vote for them will be dead by the next GE, no drunken MPs kicking the shit out of constituents in the street, no ministers with greedy snouts snuffling in Lord Ali's trough...

...and, most importantly of all, your "calm and measured" PM has never appointed a twice previously sacked, sleazy friend of the world's most notorious paedophile to the most important international diplomatic position in government, especially not one who had previously leaked state secrets to his sleazy, paedophile friend and also to China and Russia. No, no, no.

Hold on a minute...

Angela Rayner was already cleared ofctax dodging by HMRC and has just been cleared by Parliament.

poetryandwine · 14/05/2026 07:49

Correction: Angela Rayner has just been cleared by HMRC

TirednessOnToast · 14/05/2026 09:18

@TeaCupTinselTHANK YOU so much for rhe Full Facts site link. Very interesting!
8 agree that this is entirely the wrong time to attempt to oust KS who has been doing a steady job in difficult times. We'll regret it!

Meadowfinch · 14/05/2026 12:58

poetryandwine · 14/05/2026 07:49

Correction: Angela Rayner has just been cleared by HMRC

Has she?

All I have seen is that Angela Rayner has paid the £40,000 outstanding tax, and she says she has been exonerated, which is very different.

Until I see a statement from HMRC, I'll reserve judgement.

Sadcafe · 14/05/2026 13:08

Rayner aside, how does Streeting still have his job, it’s a bit like. Caesar telling Brutus he has every confidence in him as he stabbed him in the back

Sadcafe · 14/05/2026 13:11

Literally news broke he’s resigned as I posted last post

poetryandwine · 14/05/2026 14:10

Meadowfinch · 14/05/2026 12:58

Has she?

All I have seen is that Angela Rayner has paid the £40,000 outstanding tax, and she says she has been exonerated, which is very different.

Until I see a statement from HMRC, I'll reserve judgement.

Edited

HMRC are not in the habit of commenting on anyone’s tax affairs, as I understand it. I hope that’s correct, and I extend that wish to the tax affairs of the country’s slimiest - amongst whom I do not number Angela Rayner.

I feel sure you are not the only cynic here and that AR knows this. I daresay that if she wants to advance politically she will release something to satisfy any reasonable person.

PropertyD · 14/05/2026 14:26

HeadofAudiology · 13/05/2026 23:41

I see what you mean. After all since your "calm and measured" PM took over, we've seen no scandals at all.

No corrupt anti-corruption ministers, no fraudsters appointed to ministerial positions, no deputy PMs dodging paying tax, no ministers or MPs lying about being "economists" or "lawyers" on their CVs, no one hoping old ladies who won't vote for them will be dead by the next GE, no drunken MPs kicking the shit out of constituents in the street, no ministers with greedy snouts snuffling in Lord Ali's trough...

...and, most importantly of all, your "calm and measured" PM has never appointed a twice previously sacked, sleazy friend of the world's most notorious paedophile to the most important international diplomatic position in government, especially not one who had previously leaked state secrets to his sleazy, paedophile friend and also to China and Russia. No, no, no.

Hold on a minute...

Quite.

user1464187087 · 14/05/2026 14:39

PomplaMouse · 13/05/2026 16:56

That's just an example of some of the deranged nonsense people spout about Starmer.

Please expand on this.
He was the head of the Crown Prosecution Service and Director of Public Prosecutions when Savile was alive.
Savile was free to abuse god knows how many people as he saw fit.
Starmer failed to take any action against Savile and he went to his grave a free man.
These are facts, not deranged nonsense.
Please tell me what part of the above is untrue.

ElenOfTheWays · 14/05/2026 14:44

quocket · 11/05/2026 21:08

I don’t disbelieve you but I haven’t seen that about Batman before, do you have a link? I don’t want to google for obvious reasons

What obvious reasons? Harriet Harman PIE will give you your answers

caringcarer · 14/05/2026 15:05

He makes constant U turns. He can't control his back benchers. He's a useless leader. I'll be happy if he goes.

caringcarer · 14/05/2026 15:09

PropertyD · 14/05/2026 14:26

Quite.

👏Don't forget all the freebies he took from glasses for passes, dresses for his wife, suits, weekend breaks in a penthouse, Arsenal tickets, tickets for pop concerts etc etc

ElenOfTheWays · 14/05/2026 15:09

SevenYellowHammers · 11/05/2026 22:42

Could you post your evidence for these claims please?

It's well known. HH advocated for the Paedophile Information Exchange in the 70s/80s. She also advised that "child porn" laws should be loosened. This is settled fact. Nor has she apologised for this.

Her opinions on transwomen being women and her nonsense take on the SCJ are all publicly available. All this has been pulled out of storage and rehashed recently since her appointment (I'm old and knew it anyway) but how have you missed this?

Locutus2000 · 14/05/2026 15:13

ElenOfTheWays · 14/05/2026 15:09

It's well known. HH advocated for the Paedophile Information Exchange in the 70s/80s. She also advised that "child porn" laws should be loosened. This is settled fact. Nor has she apologised for this.

Her opinions on transwomen being women and her nonsense take on the SCJ are all publicly available. All this has been pulled out of storage and rehashed recently since her appointment (I'm old and knew it anyway) but how have you missed this?

It's well known. HH advocated for the Paedophile Information Exchange in the 70s/80s. She also advised that "child porn" laws should be loosened. This is settled fact. Nor has she apologised for this.

As always, it's a bit more nuanced than that.

How paedophiles infiltrated the left and hijacked the fight for civil rights

A 1970s campaign to lower the age of consent has returned to haunt Harriet Harman, Patricia Hewitt and Jack Dromey. But in such a liberal climate, it wasn't hard for a small, determined group to exploit a commitment to free speech

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/02/how-paedophiles-infiltrated-the-left-harriet-harman-patricia-hewitt

JustGiveMeReason · 14/05/2026 16:06

TeaCupTinsel · 14/05/2026 06:31

I find one of the websites which is handy for seeing what any government achieves in power is 'Full fact'.

Even some of the hyperbole above just evidences the media sway. Means testing the WFA, for example, is one of those always presented as 'killing grannies' (see posts above!). The elderly population of the UK is the wealthiest generation. This is a quote from The Telegraph (so can't be accused of cherry picking from left wing publications!)

'Baby Boomers (born 1946–1964) are currently the richest generation in the UK, holding roughly 80% of the nation's wealth and owning over three-quarters of all privately held housing wealth.'

The government didn't 'get rid' of the WFA they means tested it. A generation who hold 80% of the UK's wealth do not ALL need a WFA payment. There will always be people either side of the 'cut off' point who struggle, the same with child benefit and every other payment that's ever been given to any demographic. The rhetoric around that whole situation was awful though and buried the reality of the wealth supporting that generation, especially compared against families who were struggling in poverty.

The same people cheered when benefits were capped at two children by the Tories and we saw a massive increase of children pushed into poverty in schools and breakfast clubs had to be extended.

The Tories are, by and large, voted for by the elderly and their policies are targeted as such. Labour's policies tend to lean more towards the family/workers. Their policies will naturally favour their targeted demographics.

Either way: the media reporting is awful.

fullfact.org/government-tracker/

I've not come across that website.
Thanks @TeaCupTinsel

I totally agree with what you have said about the Winter Fuel Allowance. Ridiculous that they U-turned on that. It is another example of the press drumming up ridiculous images of freezing pensioners, rather than doing anything old fashioned like researching and reporting on factual facts. Ludicrous that some of the wealthiest people automatically get given a Winter Fuel Allowance, when, overwhelmingly it is their children and grandchildren struggling with the cost of living more than them.

Anon501178 · 14/05/2026 16:18

He has done alot of positive things for families, especially lower income ones like mine, so he gets my vote 👍

incidentally · 14/05/2026 16:20

Amen. You are so right.

incidentally · 14/05/2026 16:21

hollygoolightly · 11/05/2026 20:01

People are literally being radicalised by the media and social media. It's scary.

This. I've been saying this for years now.

incidentally · 14/05/2026 16:24

Sorry to bombard this thread with posts, but this thread is the most sensible take on the situation I have yet to see pretty much anywhere.

PomplaMouse · 14/05/2026 17:53

user1464187087 · 14/05/2026 14:39

Please expand on this.
He was the head of the Crown Prosecution Service and Director of Public Prosecutions when Savile was alive.
Savile was free to abuse god knows how many people as he saw fit.
Starmer failed to take any action against Savile and he went to his grave a free man.
These are facts, not deranged nonsense.
Please tell me what part of the above is untrue.

Starmer failed to take any action against Savile
How could he have?

The police made a referral (re. 4 historic abuse claims) to the CPS in late 2009.

The reviewing lawyer made a decision not to pursue charges.

The reviewing lawyer could (and should) have escalated the matter up the chain of command, which could ultimately have resulted in a refferal to the DPP, but did not.

Nobody can act on something they don't know about.

That Starmer, nor anyone else above the reviewing lawyer, was not informed of the case, has been extensively documented.

Boris Johnson, of course, made an allegation that Starmer "failed to prosecute" Saville, which was widely condemned by Tory officials as being indefensible, demand that Johnson apologize, and prompted Johnson's own policy manager to resign in protest.

All to say, the suggestion that Starmer bore any personal responsibility is widely known to be baseless, and a disgusting one to make (both for the falsity of it, and the bad-faith explotation of horrendous crimes).

Incidentally, re. "Savile was free to abuse god knows how many people as he saw fit" - there are no documented allegations of abuse after 2009.

Swipe left for the next trending thread