Labour &Starmer ?

What do the members feel about Sir KIER Starmers latest talks in the HAGUE concerning immigrants ,he is apparently seeking an agreement with the E.U should Labour win the next election and that is """He wants these GANGS who are profiting from sending the immigrants here by classing them on par as "TERRORISTS"" BUT and here's the BUT it would have to be agreed that we take in 100,000 of these illegal layabouts every year !!!!! The present Home Sec Braverman says this deal would tie us to accepting these every year and make BRITAIN a dumping ground for the E.U.
WELL DONE STARMER YOU CAN FORGET MY VOTE YOU PILLOCK !!!!!Just what is he and his cronies are thinking by even talking this kind of traitorism ????? I have no objection to GENUINE Asylum people ,but not what i am seeing almost every day on the news , Thus far some 20,973 have landed her on a total of 436 small boats , 440 arrived yesterday on KENT shores alone !!!! I wonder iwhat Hitler would of thought about these small boats ????????? WHOEVER IS CHARGE JUST STOP THEM !!!!
gb.

He won't get my vote either, Labour gotta do some radical changes and fast because the tory leader is weak and slimey so, they can win but, Not with Starmer

So far Sunak has done a great job also today blaming the striking nhs staff for his failure to meet his targets. The Tory health minister as not met with the unions for over 7 months, you'd think they would make an effort?

so would you want the torys in alan ? .

NO I WOULD NOT WHUPS ,BUT i would hope /wish that he and his party could come up with something better than what he is advocating !!!G.B.

if you dont want the torys in at the next election stop knocking labour . there maybe a change in policies when they get in .

I sincerely hope they get in. Then after all the complaining and criticizing, they will have to actually do something about what they've been moaning about. I bet some labour mp's are sh****ng themselves at the size of the task, but benefits will probably go up and the unions will once again run the country. The tories will probably implode and labour will be in power for years. Good luck with that scenario...

this country will be well ruined by then & the 1st thing they want to do is get those private companies out of the NHS .

Whupsy, winning by default is not winning, if starmer gets in he's only going to spent forever blaming the torys and saying " its gonna take time to put it all right" Its not excuses we want, its action and starmer has no plan of action, Only one man can fix it,

BORIS......

I agree Tom, bring back Boris LINK

And the Tories are doing a great job tackling immigration arnt they ,come to think about it is their anything they sent making a complete mess of still they talk a good game

It matters not, the political ideals of whatever party holds the majority in parliament, what is ordered by the rest of United Nations, the Controllers, The wishes of Them Men, will always have to be followed.
The agreement is already made. We will HAVE to accept the floods of immigrants, or we will have to bear the consequences of refusal to comply.

On about which LINK

I managed 1 minute and 27 seconds of that link, as I just cannot stand that accent!
It's worse than Scouse!!!

A lot of those middle England swing voters, which Labour will be relying on to get elected, will not like this policy at all.

Kier starmer says it isn't
True . The torys are spreading nonsence and lies about what he wants to do about stopping migrants sounds like the torys are getting desperate

The Tories are desperate,they hadn't done one thing in 13 years that has improved this country so what's left accept try to ruin the perception of the Labour party

so tomplum you want a proven liar & cheat as PM . you must be on something stronger than bitter pal .

Golden bear
Kier starmer says he won't put migrants in hotels as well stopping the boats so what is the truth if he can do that it looks like Torys have been hopeless ,

Whupsy Boris gets the job done and proven by his track record, If he was to take the job of stopping the rafts coming to England, I am confident it would happen,
And, yes he tells a fib now and again and he likes a party So What?

So what are Starmer's plans to house them and how is he going to stop the boats?

We await with interest!

When Corbyn was leader of the Labour Party and he put forward his Manifesto before the last general election, off the top of me head they were 'nationalising everything which had been privatised' lending the money to compensate the shareholders of those nationalised companies, that would have been billions and billions of pounds of borrowing, and if you think the financial markets went crackers when Liz Truss wanted to cut some taxes, just think what would have happened if Corbyn had come to power, he did not think that Russia was a threat anymore, so he wanted to get rid of our nuclear deterrent and cut back the armed forces, and he wanted a second EU referendum, everybody in the country knew that folk did not want Corbyn's policies, that was everyone but the Labour Party and the Momentum movement, because they just carried on regardless, and the people spoke at the general election and Labour were decimated, and I bet the only people who were surprised about that were members of the Labour Party, and do they ever learn from their mistakes, NO, because Labour are doing it all over again, Labour should have stopped Khan from bringing in the ULEZ zone in London, because it is a big vote loser, and not just in London, and yesterday Starmer effectively took the first steps to us rejoining the EU, when any Labour leader with half a brain would keep well away from having anything to do with the EU, but he, Kier Starmer and the Labour Party just don't get it do they, and is this a senile Tony Blair pulling the strings behind the scenes, determined to take us back into the EU, but the main problem for Labour is that any move towards the EU is going to be a vote loser, and they cannot or will not see that.

So why do I care ? well I hate this lot who are in power, they are not even proper Tories, they are disgrace, and we need a change, and unfortunately only the Labour Party can bring about that change, and they are blowing it, and what we are going to be left with after the next general election is a hung parliament, with either Labour or the Conservatives in power, and then it will be back to the chaos of what it was like between 2017 and 2019 in that hung parliament, when no legislation could be got through parliament.

Sunak and Starmer are the equivalent of Trump and Biden they are both a couple of idiots, add Macron into the mix, and it is no surprise that Putin decided to take advantage of the fact that the leaders of the free world are a bunch of morons.

Watched that link TOMMY 2S THANKS BUD!
IT WAS WELL PRESENTED AND ALAS VERY TRUE IN MY OPINION .
G.B.

why r u talking anyone down 1stroke did,nt you hoodwink people on here to support your hero farage & his party ukip . tell us where is ukip now ? .

Whupsy

YooKip served it's purpose, in my case and for me successfully, but I never thought that it was a serious rival to Labour or the Conservatives, in gaining enough popularity and votes to be able to form a government, and my interest in UKIP ended with the result of the EU referendum in 2016 and that dear Whupsy is over seven years ago now, my political interest is in the here and now, and in the near future with a general election looming.

YOO on the other hand Whupsy, you live years in the past, and show allegiance to a Labour Party which no longer exists, in fact you couldn't care less what the Labour Party policies are, you just want to use the Labour Party as a tool to hurt the Tories, such is your hatred of what happened between 30 and 50 years ago, the main focus being in the middle of that range, some 40 years ago, with the build up, strike and aftermath of the miners strike in the early 1980s.

So Whupsy, why don't yoo attempt to use that rats nest inside of your head, which purports to be a brain, and think about contemporary politics, instead of political history.

Or just carry on being a donkey.

TTS
A lot of what you talk about is not facts for a start Corbyn did not get in so the rest of this story is in you imagination what if ,
What if , we can all say what if ,

I don't vote tory but after voting labour (cos mi dad did) for a number of years and seeing what a rabble it's turned into, I wouldn't vote for them as long as I've got a hole in my arris. From what I've seen over the years is labour voting against anything and everything.......as I've said get them in Government and see how good they are then.

Posted by: surfer_tom (632)
"TTS
A lot of what you talk about is not facts"

He does that on a regular basis on lots of subjects.
He's been found out on more than one occasion for making things up to suit or justify his own agenda.

He is ( in my opinion ) a not so smart a**e

I think if we had another vote on brexit more people would vote to stay in, so it could be a vote winner? The tories were still blaming labour for problems 10 yrs after they gained power, they are all the same!

The EU is in chaos – and Keir Starmer can’t be trusted to keep us out of it
Remainers appear to be in a state of total ignorance about how the bloc has evolved since Brexit
CAMILLA TOMINEY
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
15 September 2023 • 5:43pm
Camilla Tominey

A while ago I received an email from one of those fact-checking websites questioning a story I had written about Sir Keir Starmer trying to block Brexit 48 times. As is often the case with such supposedly “unbiased” inquisitions, the intention seemed to be to find me guilty of falsely maligning the former shadow Brexit secretary. Suffice to say the investigation ended abruptly when I supplied a comprehensive and detailed list of every time the Labour leader tried to block Brexit, complete with Hansard references.
But then the fact-checkers set their sights on former prime minister Boris Johnson after he made a slightly different claim: that Starmer had “voted” 48 times to take the UK back into the European Union. “This is not correct,” they concluded with trademark pomposity. “The figure appears to be based on how Mr Starmer voted in 48 votes related to Brexit. But some of these votes were not about whether Britain should be part of the EU, and all but three took place before Britain left the EU.”
While the site argued Johnson was wrong to say the former director of public prosecutions had “voted” 48 times to take the UK back into the EU – by doing so, it reminded everyone of just how many times Starmer did set his face against the result of a referendum in which a clear majority voted to leave the bloc.
Of course, you do not have to undertake a lengthy fact-checking mission to know that Starmer was one of Parliament’s Brexit blockers in chief. You just have to have a memory. And while I appreciate that a week is a long time in politics, you’d have to have appalling powers of recall to forget his declaration, in November 2018, that Brexit “can be stopped”.
Only those suffering from severe amnesia would fail to remember all the times he campaigned to remain in the single market, the customs union and the bloc itself.
So when he insists that he doesn’t want to reverse the referendum result, anyone with any knowledge of politics from 2016 to 2019 will suspect that Starmer is speaking politically not personally. He’s not giving an honest opinion, he’s simply trying to win back the Red Wall voters Labour lost in 2019. Like most members of the liberal metropolitan elite, he deplores Brexit and would surely go running back to Brussels in a heartbeat if he could.
This week, the truth of the lie was exposed by Labour’s proposal to effectively take an annual quota of asylum seekers from the EU in return for an agreement that would allow Britain to send back some Channel migrants.
Insisting that closer co-operation with Brussels on the small boats crisis would mean taking back control of a situation the Government had lost total control of, he was forced to deny the proposals were a first step towards reversing Brexit, saying there was “no case for going back to the EU”.
Yet he refused to say how many asylum seekers he would be willing to accept as part of a “burden sharing” deal with Brussels, suggesting it would be a matter of negotiation. Negotiation with the EU? Good luck with that, mate. After holding discussions with Europol on Thursday, the opposition leader will meet Emmanuel Macron to discuss the plan next week.
He is also due to meet that other bastion of social cohesion, Justin Trudeau, prime minister of Canada, this weekend.
Make no mistake, this looks to be all about realigning with Brussels, as spelled out by David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, when he suggested in June that Labour could tear up the Brexit deal to forge closer economic links with the bloc, as part of his “Britain Reconnected” scheme.
But that is not the end of Labour’s deception. For Starmer is also being dishonest with voters about the implications of cosying back up to a system that is currently in chaos. Post-Brexit Britain may well be broken but the EU is a complete basket case.
Take its migrant settlement schemes. Europe is facing a massive influx of undocumented people. In June, EU interior ministers endorsed a scheme to distribute migrants among its members more evenly, sharing responsibility for people entering the Schengen Area without authorisation.
But this week, Germany pulled the plug on an initiative to accept refugees from Italy, despite it nearly collapsing under the weight of mass arrivals at Lampedusa. More than 123,800 migrants have arrived in Italy this year, including more than 8,000 this week. In a move that should raise serious alarm bells with Starmer, Berlin has accused Rome of failing to meet its own obligations to take back migrants. So much for solidarity.
Last month, meanwhile, Mateusz Morawiecki, the prime minister of Poland, agreed to go ahead with a referendum on the EU migration scheme, in which voters will be asked if they are willing to accept “thousands of illegal immigrants from the Middle East and Africa”. Along with Hungary, Poland has objected to the proposals from the start, regarding the quotas set by Brussels as “illegal”.
Several European countries have also been flirting with Rwanda-style schemes. Earlier this month, Karl Nehammer, the chancellor of Austria, said his government plans to “outsource” applications for asylum procedures to third states, saying: “We will not give in.” Despite already having some of the strictest rules in Europe on asylum applications, Denmark has also considered the idea of processing migrants in Kigali.
Presumably, no one has thought to mention any of this to all those Remainers, gormlessly waving EU flags at the Proms at the Royal Albert Hall last weekend.
These poor deluded souls “remain” under the illusion that the EU is some sort of friendly and progressive family of nations, when in fact its members are at each other’s throats over immigration.
Moreover, a lot of them are now what they would probably describe as “rabidly” Right-wing. Wave an EU flag these days and you are celebrating a union of countries led by politicians who most Remainers would never dream of backing if they were British. And those that haven’t lurched to the Right yet look ripe to do so, with Marine Le Pen polling well in France and the AfD gaining momentum in Germany. So-called “populists” have been doing well in the Netherlands, too, as part of a revolt against net zero.
If more nationalists get elected in the coming years, the EU “project” is going to start looking even more shaky than it is already. And let’s not even get started on some of the member states’ economic woes, which sometimes make stagnant Britain look like an economic powerhouse.
Remainers’ view of the EU as an efficient, technocratic progressive bloc is a fantasy. Think the situation in Britain is bad today? Just wait until Starmer gets into power and seeks to drag us back into this madness.

That about covers it gaffer...

Chesh luv, Tommy 2 stroke is the second to none best political expert on here, He might give the impression of a working class sun reader but, he is a coiled spring and , ready to hit hard at people who underestimate his intelligence, You'd do well not to antagonize him and, Take note of his moral fibres, He keeps up with the times and adjusts his speeds to keep with the flow, he knows when to bend and when to duck and more importantly , he knows when to deliver the sucker punch, A rare breed and one to be respected,

That's a very interesting comment Tom

But does he claim to be ignoring people at every given opportunity and then do the exact opposite?


Just asking

I'm not academically good, so I'm not in the best position to underestimate anyones intelligence.
If I do decide to underestimate anyones intelligence, I will have to find traces of it first

reet well, listen/read and learn, you won't go far wrong,

Interesting comment, but coming from from the man who says I am ignoring.......(insert screen name here).....but doesnt .

I think we shouldn't take it seriously

Is Cherry's open again ? there is a strong smell off Stella lager here tonight ??

TTS...for prime-minister...here here...here here....as they say in the house...

ukip served it,s purpose did it . and wot was that , selling us down the river based on a pack of lies . it shows wot you are 1stroke an idiot & fool who got hoodwinked by a conman who now backtracks & says he got it wrong . letting these bunch of criminals make laws for themselves & not us just because you did,nt like the ones made in the EU . that,s wot the likes of you got us into . fool .

Still waiting for an answer to what Starmer intends to do about housing the boat people and how he will stop them crossing the channel.

why stop them ? . hypocrites like you jump & cheer when a foreigner goes over the tryline for wigan , dont you .

So do I whups,difference is they have visa’s,and will be going home when they expire!

Cheshire Puss

"He's been found out on more than one occasion for making things up to suit or justify his own agenda"

Ooooohhhhh

How could yoo

Yoo have offended my person

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (13837)
"Am just trying to get me facts right, I should have read it properly, but it's this hot weather, it's addled me brain"
^^^^^
That is what you posted last week.
I'm very sorry if I offended you. That was not my intention.
My advice to you, is stay indoors with your blinds down when the sun is out

Oooooohhhh

Yoo are stickin knife in

Don't worry Tommy Tee, folks looking for faults will find them even in a Rolls Royce, chesh drinks from a tumbler half empty
after some short interchanges with the chesh

she sent me in a deep depression

GAFFER /
I HAVE TO CONGRATULATE YOU ON THE ARTICLE YOU POSTED CONCERNING STARMER , you were are completely spot on in all you wrote . His latest rendition is to allow women and children a " SAFE ROUTE " MY backside he just wants to admit as many as he can and as for trying to agree with the E.U to resend some back ,i believe the E.U . have scoffed that plan and told him were he can go !!! For me he is a utter tosser and i will never ever trust him !!
G.B.

If Labour get in at the next election,and I think they will, there will be lots more immigrants coming here, Whups should take a few in.

It's easy to sop illegal immigrants .no passport no benefits .If they can afford 7k for a ride on a dingy they are hardly skint .plus wigan council are the most corrupt council ever .backhandeRS and sack if you criticise them .some labour councillor s even hate their own council

"some labour councillor s even hate their own council"

I should expect they do, seeing as their council will be conservative controlled.

Whups

And you don't when one of the United team of mostly foreign players score a goal?

And some Labour Councillors in Wigan are only Labour to get the allowances which they know they would never get standing as a Tory!

Paul faza
Please enlighten us Labour councilers hate there own council ,
This cold be interesting
Tonker

STARMER GIVE THE MAN A CHANCE,

Surfer Tom, this could be complicated as well as interesting. "Interestingly complicated", if you will !

Look at the record of this conservative goverment last 13 years and their pledges, 6 pms , brexit, cost of living up, no borders, energy prices,gas,electric, all, ,up
Mortgages up, strikes , schools falling down ,sleeze from top to bottom they have filled their boots !

Would you say "this" conservative goverment is responsible for the cost of living increase in every other country in the World?

We are still paying out Because of the lizz truss budget she was a walking disaster even the torys admitted that,

People seem to forget that we live in a World.
Not only that, we are a small part of the World.
The rest of the World could switch us off, should they want to.
It follows that we have to do what the rest of the World want us to, whether we like it or not.
The Tories are not responsible for the price of gas from other countries. Other countries are. They aren't responsible for the price of oil, other countries are.
The rest of the World have got Great Britain with it's pants down and the only thing to stop us being continually shafted is what nobody wants, and that's WAR . But, as it stands at the moment, we wouldn't win that either!
Our hands will be full when all these immigrants, along with their lawless ambitions, start chopping people up. That's when the shit really will hit the fan!

When the War does start the problem will be, how do we identity the enemy, they won't be wearing a uniform or flying a flag,

People who start war Because they want power, it will always be like that ,in the old wars they used lay seige to starve them out,now they have weaponized what we need to survive its people who want power who are to blame it won't change

Remember the old adage, "Divide and Conquer" ?

Well, the British, naturally, will have divided opinions.
The immigrants will all have the same motive.

Also, and I know I've said it many times before, remember what Tosh Badouri said ........ "We will be forced to take up arms against them"!

yes i do todger because unlike you i,m not a racist .

Whups,

Please explain what makes you think I am racist when all I asked was "do you cheer when one of the foreign players at United score a goal"

The late evening drinking perhaps!

your the one who mentions racist comments like boat people ETC . and yes i do cheer when a foreign player scores for united . do you ? .

Another dreary pointless post OC get that test took

yes colin he,s full of them . david austin called last week .

Last time labour was in they opened flood gates n bankrupt the country there's nowt left remember. Plus they sound a 3rd of our gold reserves at the cheapest price it's ever been lol

I know a David Austin from shevington....has a brother Steven....mad latics fan !!

Is David ok brian?I had him on face book but lost it so not contacted him for ages ,think it's a different David BB

it,s definitely a different david austin . you might see him shortly colin .

it was the bankers who bankrupted the country , get it right . we would.nt have to sell the gold if they had,nt played russian roulette with our money .

Thanks for that ...

Gold sale. The Backstory:

In 1999, Chancellor Gordon Brown sought to sell off 401 tonnes (56%) of the UK’s gold reserves. The logic was that gold wasn’t being used as a safe haven as much as it had been before, and that foreign currencies like the US Dollar and the imminent Euro would generate much better returns.

The price of gold in the late 1990s was roughly between $254 and $312 per ounce. A 20-year bear market - since the abandonment of the Gold Standard by President Nixon - had been pushing global prices down. Brown was worried that the price would continue to drop even further, so he sought to sell as soon as possible. At the same time, nearing the Millennium, the US Dollar was getting stronger under President Clinton’s administration, and stock markets were making steady gains as interest in tech stocks grew (into what would become the Dot Com Bubble of 2000/01).


The Sale:

Originally intended to be a secret, the planned sale was brought up in a question for the Treasury in the House of Commons on Friday May 7th. The confirmation of intention from the Treasury subsequently alerted the gold market, and the gold price fell by $10 per ounce. There was also the issue of auctions; 17 were planned, suggesting that the UK Treasury did not expect the price to improve any time soon and were thus looking to hedge their bets and make multiple sales to maximise the money made.

The total sale of the gold bullion sold was $3.5 billion, at $275 per ounce average sale value. It is somewhat ironic that Gordon Brown’s attempts to make as much money as possible from a staggered sale resulted in over $100 million less for the gold compared to when the sale hadn’t been announced, but it’s damning just how much more that gold would have been worth further down the line. Gold was $921 per ounce early in May 2009, which would put the gold sold at $11.8 billion in value - $8.3 billion more than Brown got. The 20-year price rise is worse still, with gold currently at $1,279 per ounce. This would make the gold bullion worth $16.4 billion - $12.9 billion more than was received in 1999.

Ignoring the Bank of England:

The bear market, combined with the rise of stocks, shares, and major currencies, was a very tempting prospect for Gordon Brown and a way of making the UK’s assets generate more income for the country. On paper, it looked like a fair move, but the advice from the Bank of England was not to sell – especially when large quantities were already being sold from countries including the Netherlands, Australia, and Argentina.

Gold is known as a safe haven asset that has a traditionally negative correlation with the stock markets. It is strange then that Gordon Brown did not appreciate the bull/bear nature of markets and the fluctuations that come part and parcel with trading.

One reason for this oversight and ignoring the guidance of the BoE could be the Special Relationship between the UK and the US; a temptation to please the USA and back the US Dollar and present a united front for geopolitical reasons internationally, and PR reasons domestically.

Nobody blames Brown for not predicting the market crash after the Dot Com Bubble burst but given the benefits of gold as a diversification of assets it’s hard to forgive the then Chancellor for the oversight, and he was warned.
.

I wonder if his belief that he had cured the occurrence of economic downturns promoted his erroneous judgment.