Keir Starmer needs to be persuaded to support socialist social care policy. He must go

Keir Starmer: someone recently said he’d run out of Brylcreem long before he ever gets to run the UK and on the basis of this failure, that is just as well.

This is a shocking indictment of the man who pretends to be the Labour Party’s leader.

Keir Starmer had to be told to oppose the Conservative plan to increase National Insurance that poor people pay – increasing poverty – under the pretext that it is to fund social care.

It’s worse than that – it is class warfare, and a class war in which Starmer seems firmly on the side of the rich few against the masses who made him Labour leader.

Firstly, let’s address the elephant in the room: nobody has to be taxed to pay for social care. The government owns the magic money tree and can simply create the cash.

The principal reason we talk about people being taxed to pay for such measures is because taxation is needed to control inflation – but inflation hasn’t been a problem whenever the Tory government has created money for itself and its friends over the last 11 years, so it doesn’t seem a problem.

If we accept that improving social care may cause inflation, then there are better ways to tax that problem away. For a start, there is a very rich part of society that isn’t taxed nearly enough – and won’t be forced into starvation or onto the streets if they are asked to pay a little more:

The issue with Starmer that this has revealed is the fact that he had to be told – in fact, it seems he is resisting calls for him to support this commonsense policy. And people are calling him out on it:

Even Tory ministers are coming out against the government plan – before Starmer:

(Sorry but I don’t know who @philbc3 is or what that person may have said about it. Blame Grace, not me.)

The worst part of this is that previous Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had a perfectly good policy for funding social care – and Starmer hasn’t even had the wit to mention it. Fortunately Corbyn’s shadow chancellor is on hand to remind us all:

This last comment is perhaps the most incisive – and the most damning against Starmer:

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

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

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

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!

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

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG 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:


3 thoughts on “Keir Starmer needs to be persuaded to support socialist social care policy. He must go

  1. alison

    Definitely no War on Poverty pls. Look at the results of the War on Drugs and the War on Terror – more of both.

  2. rotzeichen


    Having read this essay on Corbynism and Starmer it is well worth reading, as it fairly describes the attitudes that persisted at those times and comments on the growth of Labour under Jeremy Corbyn, where Starmer who promised to maintain it, could have capitalised on it rather than as he done, thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

    here’s a postscript, where the article makes that clear:

    Since writing this article in early December 2020, the dangers highlighted here appear to be affecting the party’s polling. Surveys have consistently reported a figure for the Conservatives of between 40–44 per cent, while Labour has slipped back and now posts 10 point deficits. Support has been lost to the Liberal Democrats, Greens, and the nationalist parties, as the argument outlined here forecast. Likewise, Starmer’s hitherto positive ratings are now in retreat.25 The Shadow frontbench’s strategy—which has seen Labour continue with the process criticisms while at the same time trying to burnish its patriotic credentials—has not sustained the party’s recovery. Similarly, in the first few months of the new year, Labour opposed Boris Johnson’s plans to raise corporation tax, reluctantly voted against the government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts Bill and over 2021’s Easter weekend, embroiled itself in a damaging row with Labour’s LGBTQ organisation after Starmer visited and endorsed the work of the Jesus House, a church that endorses so-called homosexual conversion therapy.26 Taken together, Starmerism is not so far proving to be a winning formula for keeping Labour’s voter coalition together. Quite the opposite.

    Full article here:

    I don’t think that Starmer cares what happens to the Labour Party, some would ask who is pulling his strings more than what does he really believe in? Which is the position I would adopt, sadly though with a corrupt mass media that serves itself by deflection rather than the reality, people never have the ability to see the wood for the trees, and so follow trends rather than facts.

  3. El Dee

    I disagree, this is exactly what National Insurance was created for. What SHOULD happen is that NI should be reformed. There should be no UEL and there should be no lower rates. The lower amount should also be higher than the Living Wage.

    The main reason, in the past, for ensuring that NI was raised was that ‘technically’ NI isn’t a ‘tax’ It’s ‘National Insurance’ the fund for the NHS and other benefits. It was how some politicians of the past weasel worded their way out of breaching promises not to raise taxes.

    Simply updating the system would itself raise the necessary funds and, if done along the lines suggested, would also provide some relief to those at the bottom end..

Comments are closed.