Starmer storms it in Andrew Marr interview

Andrew Marr interviews Sir Keir Starmer [Image: BBC].

Andrew Marr interviews Sir Keir Starmer [Image: BBC].

Sir Keir Starmer is to be congratulated – and not just for refusing to be overtalked by Andrew Marr.

The veteran interviewer tried to interrupt Sir Keir on many occasions but succeeded on few, as the new Labour spokesman on exiting the EU steamed on with his points.

Perhaps it is the fact that he is a former barrister and Director of Public Prosecutions that gave Sir Keir the advantage. Mr Marr employs interruptions as a tactic to put interviewees off-guard and get them to say things they would otherwise have avoided, given time to think. Not this time.

The debate threw up some interesting points:

The Tory claim that having a vote on the terms of Brexit negotiations would “thwart the will of the British people” is, of course, nonsense. It would thwart the will of the Tories, which is to hide what they are doing and present any deal to the public as a ‘fait accompli’ that we would have to accept, like it or not.

Sir Keir’s comment that many migrant workers are employed here because of a skills shortage is absolutely correct and a direct result of the fashion for outsourcing among neoliberal governments of the past three or four decades.

Just as it was cheaper to outsource our manufacturing industries to countries where the workforce could be made to work for a pittance, it was cheaper to stop training UK citizens for the jobs that remained and simply rely on foreign workers who had been trained abroad.

Considered in this manner, it is a miracle we have any members of the indigenous population working at all.

Sir Keir came close to nailing another reason we have a high immigration rate at the moment, which is the entry of the eastern European countries, whose economies are less developed than those of the western countries, into the European Union, with its ‘free movement of workers’ rule.

What a shame he didn’t point out that the EU could have saved itself a lot of pain if it had stipulated that these countries must take advantage of the union’s economic improvement programmes, bringing themselves up to a similar level as the others, before free movement was phased in. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

He could also have pointed out that resentment of migrant workers is also fuelled by the fear that they are taking up services that are meant for UK-born citizens – and that this fear has been created by the Conservative Government’s rationing of those services, as detailed previously in This Blog.

MPs should vote on the terms of Brexit negotiations, Labour’s shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer has said.

Sir Keir told the BBC the referendum result “has to be accepted” but accused the PM of trying to “manoeuvre without any scrutiny” on how to achieve it.

He also said he believed immigration should be reduced, by increasing British workers’ skills.

Sir Keir, who returned to Labour’s front bench last week in a reshuffle following Jeremy Corbyn’s re-election as Labour leader, told BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show: “The referendum is clear and has to be accepted and we can’t have a re-run of the question that was put to the country earlier this year.

“But, and it’s a big but, there has to be democratic grip of the process and, at the moment, what the prime minister’s trying to do is to manoeuvre without any scrutiny in Parliament and that’s why the terms on, which we’re going to negotiate absolutely have to be put to a vote in the House.”

Downing Street said his call for a vote was “an attempt to find another way to thwart the will of the British people.”

The government intends to trigger Article 50, the official process for exiting the EU, by the end of March 2017.

Source: Brexit: MPs should vote on talks, says Labour’s Starmer – BBC News


Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in eBook format here:

HWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


8 thoughts on “Starmer storms it in Andrew Marr interview

  1. roybeiley

    Waited a long time to hear the likes of the articulate and knowledgeable Starmer get the better of the pompous “its my Show” Marr! These new Shadow Cabinet members are beginning to show their mettle. The electorate need to see and hear about what the Labour Party stands for NOW not what the likes of Alan Johnson says about how things used to be and still ought to be.

  2. shaun

    I suspect the Tory’s decision not involve democratic oversight is primarily centred on the reality that a vote in Parliament, on the terms for Brexit, would split the Conservatives in two. To some extent, as some sort of vote is inevitable, the longer it’s put off, which would give more time to expose the Prime minister’s weakness and divisions in her party, the better it is for Labour and Britain. By the latter I mean to have a Labour government would be better for Britain and not necessarily that delaying the decision/process is good for the country.


    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Now I’m kicking myself because I wanted to include that very point about a vote splitting the Parliamentary Tory Party in the article and forgot!

    2. NMac

      The whole referendum episode and the latest Brexit shenanigans are all designed to stop irrevocable splits in the Tory Party. So far they have all failed, but the whole nation has to suffer as the Nasty Party fights it out.

  3. casalealex

    As I understand it, the majority of people voted to leave the EU, without knowing the full implications of the vote; and now we have to negotiate terms for our leaving. The government had/have no plan on how they will achieve a deal which will be in our best interests. They are, supposedly, making decisions in secret, and refusing a proper open debate in Parliament, so that MPs can scrutinise all proposals, and hopefully come up with the best outcome for the country. I believe we should be informed of the whys and wherefores of an open discussion before a final decision is made.

Comments are closed.