Starmer Must Go

[BisiBodi]

I made a lengthy post yesterday (on this thread: www.mumsnet.com/talk/politics/5333405-changes-to-immigration-rules-announced-by-starmer?page=2 @ 17:43 if you want to read it) regarding the horrendous "island of strangers" speech by Starmer
Today, Kier Starmer has decided to say that immigration has done "incalculable damage" to the country. My despair and fury over this, and the general direction of labour, warrants its own thread.

Starmer claimed in writing that immigrants have put too much pressure on housing and public services (they don't, and he previously said they don't). He added that the immigration system is “almost designed to permit abuse” and that it risks “pulling the country apart”. He said that he wanted to close a “squalid chapter” in our country’s history (of too much immigration in the last few years), and then he seemed to quote the Rivers of Blood speech and said that without significantly reducing immigration the UK risks becoming “an island of strangers".

He's doing this because he's proposing new laws to make immigration harder and bring net migration down (except they definitely won't). Stuff like increasing it to 10 years before you can apply for indefinite leave to remain (10 years!!), introducing English language tests (in a post that suggests Welsh doesn't exist), reducing social care visas (the system would collapse in a day), being tougher on overseas students and reducing the time they can stay after graduation (if you reduce their numbers at all then Universities will be bankrupt immediately), new ID cards, reduce (oh sorry, "clarify") the amount ECHR article 8 can be used to justify people staying on human rights grounds, etc.

When someone pointed out that high migration helps economies and low hurts them, and that this is true in the EU right now and all over the world, Starmer didn't think so. He said that immigration has been high in the UK but the economy has been stagnant, so there can't be any link. Yes Keir, but the economy was stagnant during A PANDEMIC AND ENERGY CRISIS AND COST OF LIVING CRISIS AND EXPENSIVE NEW WARS AND GLOBAL MARKET TRUMP TURMOIL. If the immigrants hadn't kept us level, your "stagnant" economy would have plummeted like a rock. You cannot possibly be presenting that as X=Y in a total vacuum.

This kind of xenophobia doesn't need explaining, but it's worth saying why it won't work and will lose Labour a lot of votes:

• Conservative and Reform voters do NOT change their vote to Labour ever, so this pandering is worthless. But Labour can lose votes to the Greens and LDs at a high rate. Nearly ALL the Reform votes come from former Conservatives.
• Public concern about immigration is low and goes up and down exactly with how much the press is currently going on about it (see the graph) so is not worth alienating your voter base about
• And it is alienating voters, because you've heard this kind of rhetoric before but it was from the actual NF and BNP
• The Mail's headline today was still attacking Labour because it is impossible to ever go far enough for them, or for Reform voters. Nothing is ever enough.

So, Labour saying "Reform are right actually" won't bring a single voter over to Labour, but it sure will lose you a few. Or, er, a lot. People are resigning their Labour membership and sounding furious. I haven't seen a single event trigger this much outrage from the public (and Labour MPs) in quite a while. Starmer has hugely damaged himself. Germany's far-right AfD are praising him, that's the level it's at.

I already left for the Greens, but today has me going even further. I think it's now worth the potential chaos to get rid of Starmer's version of Labour. In a timely article today, Nesrine Malik called our current elections "hostage politics". You MUST vote Labour or the Tories will get in. Now you MUST vote Labour or Reform will get in.

I don't respond well to threats. Never have. I tend to escalate. And I'm bored of their crap: more cuts, keeping first-past-the-post even though Labour members want PR, refusing to talk about rejoining the EU even though Labour members (and the majority of the country) want full rejoin, this xenophobic shit which goes against everything Starmer said about immigration when he was running for leader (but then he's broken every pledge from that time), the anti-trans bollocks, coming for the disabled PIP and saying all benefits are too high and that people are taking advantage of handouts and all the rest.

Fuck these guys. There's pragmatic politics where you compromise, and then there's this literal far-right shit that means you personally HAVE to be comfortable with saying it in public. It's about the soul of the PM and the party. Today is way over the line of sensible cross-party anything.

And I'm done with hostage politics. What, so we keep Labour in for 8 more years of... this? Of the same or more cuts? I'm rapidly approaching the point where smashing this Labour party so that they never try to be centre- / far-right again would do more good than the short-term harm.

Voters didn't show unwavering support for Labour at the last election, they showed that they will be extremely flexible and vote for whoever can win in their area. If Labour become unpopular in the polls, that will be someone else and not them. Labour's lead is incredibly fragile and changeable and today's performance is EXACTLY how they lose it and deserve to lose it. Yes, some young men went to Reform before the election... and twice as many young women went to the Greens. Labour's share fell 21% in 18-24 year olds. You cannot gain a single Reform vote by going right. It will never be far-right enough.
Saying that Reform are correct and using their rhetoric in speeches and changing your policies to theirs is NOT how you defeat them, or run a country.

Replace Starmer, quickly. At the very least.

And so what is the purpose of this thread, other than to vent into an online echo-chamber? I think it's a request to a call to action. It's a call out to everyone who currently resides - whether you like it or not - in a Labour controlled constituency and has a labour MP.

You can easily find out the details, together with links to their speeches and/or voting records, from service such as They Work For You.
Check the details of your MP, and especially their stance on immigration and other matters important to you, then email them.

In reality once migrants are in the UK they can just jump straight on the benefits grift.

Skilled migrants (and hard working ones) will be the ones that find work..

They’re all working anyway illegally. Go get your nails done, car washed see the Deliveroo bikes outside the migrant hotels. They’ve even been caught on the news and asked about them working.

I sometimes wonder if people live in their liberal minds soaking up all the news the BBC dishes them, like the lockdown and never question it. Governments lie about wars, about lockdowns and now about migrants. It’s reckless to think this is ok.

Asylum seekers need to be properly detained, not delivering takeaways around town or whatever else.

It's a national security risk as it is. We don't know who these people are and they've broke into Britain via organised crime, paying people traffickers.

Why what?

I was questioning what you said. Have you forgotten already?

Where would you build dozens of centres that can imprison people?
you haven't answered this? you re suggesting to effectively build another prison system! with 1000s of guards.

Asylum seekers cannot work or claim benefits, if they are doing either, then thats down to UK weak enforcement.

However, i do agree its a security/crime risk but then the Russian agents in Salisbury and others who have killed for Putin, came in via legal means.

@PlantFodderIt is true we have a skills shortage in construction and no doubt some immigrants are qualified and can speak English but it’s difficult to see how many could be employable.

That’s another plus of Aus system they vet before doing any humanitarian scheme.

I’m surprised at your question.

Can you genuinely not see how giving asylum seekers the right to work will draw people here even more people here?

Come here, get housed, get a job?

Still cheaper than building houses for all of them.

I don't think that's doable either. I think a lot of people have taken umbrage with the serco contract, where landlords are offered lucrative 5 year contracts to house asylum seekers in private rentals, thus squeezing the rental market even more and inflating already sky high rents. Honestly don't know what the answer is!

It wouldn’t be like that, would it? Minimum wage, no benefits. And only until processed. I thought all these asylum seekers were supposed to be coming here for our generous benefits system?

You only get a few people if you have the Aus system…

Oh ffs, you’re obsessed with Australia. It’s been explained to you numerous times the two countries aren’t comparable.

Still a pull when the minimum wage here is higher than in Pakistan or Sudan.

And of course the benefits.

Ok you can have one built opposite your house?

Why don’t you house a dozen in your spare bedroom?

Yes moans on & on about it but can never suggest a suitable island or country off the coast of the UK.. or anywhere else!

ha ha i'm not the one advocating it, you and others are.

I'm pointing out the idiocy of this idea.

Tough.

You can moan on and on with other Labour lot but Reform are still leading. They’ll likely propose similar and win.

And the cost of living to match.

You haven’t given this nearly enough consideration.

The UK has Rockall. At least I think that’s they said

I’d say this is more your bag.

The electorate will get fed up and move on even if you keep with the same.

Nope, why would you say that? i realise the huge differences between Aus and the UK

But you keep on, in every thread about Australia and how they managed migration, i thought that as you advocate this approach for the UK, you have an Island in mind?

As for the Cons question in your early reply, yes i want the Cons to survive, they are a great political party, a shadow now of their former self and likely to vanish after 2029, i don't really want that, it wont be good for the UK.

All these suggestions about huge hubs won’t work. Not the Balkans version unless it’s a quick stay before moving them home. Then what’s the point in all that expense?

The only way it can be done is with very low numbers. It’s doable but the mandate is needed first.