Tag Archives: wing

Keir Starmer’s right-wing stance is not a smokescreen. Here’s how you can tell

Keir Starmer: he’s not left-wing but he’s definitely sinister.

Take a look at this prediction on the date and outcome of the next general election:

Personally, I think autumn might be leaving it late and we might get a spring GE, at the same time as the locals. This would save Rishi Sunak from a “lame duck” summer that could harm Tory chances at the Westminster elections even more than his premiership already has.

The prediction that Labour will go on to form a government, if accurate, heralds disaster for the UK and everyone in it, though. We would just be swapping one gang of hard-right headbangers, hell-bent on robbing the poor to fatten the rich, for another.

Voters who want to support Keir Starmer seem to be doing it on the basis of a daydream, as laid out by ‘Barney’, below:

John Holman’s response tells us exactly why any hope that Labour will move back to the left in government is forlorn: Starmer will simply say that he must honour his (right-wing) manifesto promises because that’s what voters have endorsed.

He won’t mention the fact that nobody in the Labour leadership will have given any of us, including rank-and-file part members, a chance to choose which policies should be in the manifesto in the first place.

Nor will he admit that all of Labour’s policies for the next government will have been chosen on the basis that they will win support – and donations – for Starmer and his cronies from the very rich and powerful elites of the UK, or will line their pockets in other ways. That would show that he has made his party just like the Tories.

He will keep quiet about those facts – which This Writer is sure will become self-evident to those of us with enquiring minds – because it suits him to permit the majority of voters to carry on as ‘BanAllHunting’, below, suggests:

That’s about the size of it. Without any evidence at all, people have persuaded themselves that, because he leads an organisation that still calls itself “Labour” and operates under a red banner, Starmer is their left-wing Messiah.

The actual evidence suggests otherwise. Look at the way he responds to Susanna Reid’s probing about the two-child benefit cap, here:

Confronted with what she describes as “a very unpleasant nickname” – Sir Kid Starver – he doesn’t acknowledge or respond to it – and certainly doesn’t deny it.

All he says is that his party will have an “anti-poverty strategy”, just like Tony Blair’s New Labour government did.

But it will be without any funding, apparently.

So you can see that, under even the slightest scrutiny, any claim that Starmer will create any real and lasting improvement simply falls apart.

The absolute tragedy of all this is that, deprived of this fantasy, Labour tribalists will fall back on the old falsehood that anybody who doesn’t support Labour is a “Tory enabler”. That might be effective if Starmer’s Labour had any policies to distinguish it from the Tories, but it doesn’t.

In real terms, you’re a Tory enabler if you vote either Labour or Conservative.

The only way to break this deadlock is to find someone else to support, and there is a really easy way to do this.

You simply look up the other political parties operating in your constituency, plus an independents who may be around, and find out what their policies are.

Then you choose a candidate or party to support. This will be whoever has the most policies that correspond with what you want.

And then you vote for them.

Unless you are a hard-right headbanger, hell-bent on robbing the poor to fatten the rich, that is the only sane course of action in the UK, at this time.

Why on Earth would you vote in a party with policies you don’t want, that will do things that won’t help? That’s self-harm. Anybody doing it would legitimately need treatment for mental illness.

Labour’s ‘boil a frog’ tactic is pulling the party away from voters but towards rich donors

Many years ago, a right-wing cuckoo in the Labour Party called Peter Mandelson assured the party’s then-leaders that they could shift their policies as far to the political right as they fancied because Labour voters didn’t have anywhere else to go.

He was wrong; at every general election after the 1997 landslide, the party lost voters as socialists abandoned what they saw increasingly as a party of Tories in red ties. It took the arrival of Jeremy Corbyn as leader to reverse the trend, with the re-injection of genuinely transformative policies.

And we all know what happened to him: right-wingers he had allowed to remain in the party (in the belief that it should be a genuinely “broad church”, whatever that means?) stabbed him in the back and sabotaged the 2017 (and probably the 2019) general election, eventually forcing him out.

Now, under Mandelson acolyte Keir Starmer, Labour is once-again a hard-right party. He has abandoned any “continuity Corbyn” left-wing pledges in order to follow policies that are indistinguishable from those of Rishi Sunak’s current Conservative government.

Despite this, Starmer’s Substitute Tory Party (formerly Labour) is being tipped to win the next general election by a landslide. Why?

It could be because the Sunak government is now blatantly corrupt, with new evidence of ministers (including the prime minister) lining their own pockets and those of their cronies in big business emerging every day.

It could also be because Starmer has drip-fed his right-wing policies into Labour’s programme for government slowly – giving party members and tribal followers an opportunity to forget (or simply fail to notice) the cumulative lurch to the far right that they represent:

Look at the recent announcement that a Labour government will continue to inflict poverty on 1.1 million UK children in defiance of the party’s own reason for existing (lifting working and working-class people out of poverty).

After this announcement, polls showed no lessening of enthusiasm for a Labour government – and only 20 Labour MPs seem keen to remind their leaders of the party’s duty to its members and supporters:

Why the lurch rightwards?

Obviously this is where Starmer’s political loyalties lie. He was never interested in re-balancing the economy to stop rich employers from impoverishing their workers, or to stop the destruction of our environment for the sake of a quick profit, or to stop the privatisation of our national treasures like the NHS for another quick profit.

But there’s a financial necessity too. One clear detrimental result of his rightward lurch has been an exodus of members away from a Labour Party they now consider toxic. This, along with a series of poor financial decisions, mean Starmer’s party very quickly frittered away the more-than £12 million Jeremy Corbyn had put in its bank account.

It needed funds – and went looking in the same place as the Tories:

The result is clear: two parties – Labour and the Tories – with the same policies, because they have the same people bankrolling them.

And with Starmer’s Labour working for big business, another element of the UK’s broken political system is coming into clearer focus:

That’s right. It seems the UK has been controlled by the same tiny group of super-rich influencers for many decades, with the wishes of voters coming a distant second to their selfish desires.

Continuing to vote for Labour means continuing to let this tiny minority run the rest of us into the ground for their own profit and perverse enjoyment.

It makes no sense at all.

And yet the polls show that is exactly what the majority of people want.

If you know anybody who has been misled or is deluded in this way, then for the sake of the United Kingdom and everyone in it, please explain their mistake to them. It might take a while but it will be worth it in the long run.

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

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right 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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Refugees: Grace Blakeley explains (and hammers) Tory ‘divide and rule’ tactic

A right-wing TV pundit had his arse handed to him when he tried to invoke the Tory tactic of ‘divide and rule’ to turn viewer opinion against people who have travelled to the UK in search of asylum.

Grace Blakeley, one of the UK’s brighter political commentators, pointed out exactly why his argument is utter rubbish, as highlighted by Maximilien Robespierre here:

Yes: if the issue is our treatment of Johnny and Janey Foreigner, the right-wingers tell us they are our enemy; but if the issue is accommodation of working-class people, they tell middle-class people that the workers are the baddies.

They always “other” the people who have the least. In fact, in most cases, fault lies with those who have the most. How did they get all that wealth and why are they hoarding it?

Keep the link to this clip handy; you can use it if you identify further attempts to use this false argument.

The big debates: Wednesday, July 5, 2023

Labour in denial as Starmer and his allies purge the left

Former Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell has accused current Labour leader Keir Starmer and his allies of purging left-wingers from the party.

It’s a claim that is hotly denied by Starmer’s cronies – Jonathan Ashworth on Politics Live once again raised the hoary old banner of anti-Semitism and claimed this was what Starmer was fighting.

But is that really all Starmer is doing? And is it on the level?

Here’s the debate:

And here are some of the other attacks on Labour members Starmer’s mob have been carrying out:

Will the NHS reach its centenary – and how can that happen?

The 75th anniversary of the NHS was marked with not one but two debates on the BBC’s Politics Live – the first on how it can survive in a changing United Kingdom.

Should government prioritise prevention, improving the nation’s health generally, as championed by Lord Bethell? Should it adopt a European-style health insurance model, according to Melanie Phillips? Should it increase the pay, and widen the membership, of its workforce, as Baroness Kennedy claims? Or should social care be expanded to remove some of the pressure, in line with Ella Whelan’s beliefs?

Should private health firms be allowed to do more NHS work?

The second of the two Politics Live debates on the NHS’s 75th anniversary focused on claims that radical change is needed to safeguard its future.

Some of those claims attack the fundamental principle that the health service should be free at the point of use, with Tony Blair saying some NHS patients should go private and pay for procedures if they’re waiting too long.

But wouldn’t this put the UK on a slippery slope towards a privatised – and highly expensive – health service?

SNP’s Mhairi Black shows that Tory and Labour both want more NHS privatisation

On the 75th anniversary of the UK’s National Health Service, SNP deputy leader Mhairi Black demonstrated that it is in danger from both the Conservative and Labour parties.

Reading out two quotations from politicians calling for more privatisation, she asked – well, watch the clip and you’ll see.

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

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right 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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Starmer’s Labour is allying with extreme right-wing parties. What does that tell you?

Blue Labour: otherwise known as the ‘other’ Conservative Party.

This is unforgiveable:

I refer, of course, to the decision by members of Keir Starmer’s Labour Party to go into coalition with the Conservatives. That is not acceptable under any circumstances and the people of the Wirral should demand another election.

Worse still, Labour has also suspended the Wirral West constituency party without explanation:

Sadly, the Wirral isn’t the only place this is happening:

Reform UK is even more right-wing than the Conservative Party!

And here’s a council where Labour has deliberately sabotaged an opportunity to keep the Tories out:

That was a decision by the party’s National Executive Committee; Keir Starmer’s cronies would rather have councils run by Tories than their own party. What does that tell you?

It’s clear what this kind of behaviour has told the executive committee of Copeland CLP:

It seems Starmer and his right-wing goons are chasing out the remaining party members who remember what Labour should be, in order to replace them with far-right Tory clones.

Or should that be clowns?

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

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right 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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Is this the reason Keir Starmer is so timid about the economy?

Funded by private business: Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves both receive donations from private businesses, and it is reasonable to conclude that they receive advice (let’s call it that) from those people too. Given that they don’t seem to have much personal understanding of how the economy works, this may be the reason they are now following right-wing, Establishment, ideas that will help billionaires and crush people like you.

That rising star of left-wing journalism Grace Blakely has written an interesting piece for Tribune, stating that Keir Starmer is too timid to run the UK economy for the people – basically because he doesn’t know enough about it.

Starmer relies on his economic advisers, she says, and they adhere to right-wing dogma that prioritises the rich over the poor:

It is no longer radical to argue that the UK economy requires deep, structural transformation. With the power to set taxes, levels of public spending, wages in the public sector, and regulation in the private sector, the British state is the only institution capable of enacting such a transformation… The British electorate is in favour of a radical shift in economic policy.  

Keir Starmer is undoubtedly a timid and conservative leader… His expert advisers inform him, allegedly objectively, which kinds of policies would be good for ‘the economy’, and he rigidly adheres to their advice.

Without ever providing any evidence, policymakers will state that ‘the economy’ requires tax cuts, or public spending cuts, or deregulation. Experts will nod along and, without the ability to challenge them, most people will simply accept their word as gospel. 

And the policies these ‘experts’ promote just so happen to privilege the interests of the already wealthy while eroding the power of the working classes.

An example of this in action is the National Health Service. When he was campaigning to be Labour leader in 2020, Starmer said he would follow Jeremy Corbyn’s policy to increase income tax on the top five per cent of earners.

This would allow more spending – for example, on the NHS. But now Starmer has rowed back on this pledge, despite the fact that it would help re-balance the economy, which the Tories have tilted to give more money to billionaires:

And now we learn that he’s giving a speech today (Monday, May 22, 2023) saying that the NHS doesn’t need more money – he thinks it is “not serious” to suggest that the NHS’s current issues can be fixed solely with more money.

He won’t say how he’ll change the way the NHS works in order to fix those issues, though – probably because he doesn’t know.

His favoured solution is to bring in more privatisation – as advocated by his Shadow Health Secretary, Wes Streeting.

Why does he say this? Would it be unreasonable to suggest that it is because they are both receiving donations from private firms that make a profit from the UK’s health industry?

Private companies don’t make donations to MPs without wanting something in return; we all know that – right?

And if you think that’s bad, what about the money going to MPs so they can employ staff and pay for “office costs”? If private firms or donors are paying this money, are they dictating who gets the jobs – putting their own people in a position to advise our MPs?

If so, then we should be deeply concerned that almost half of the £1 million that has gone to MPs for this purpose was given to just four Labour MPs – including Streeting.

Another major beneficiary is Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves.

With so much apparent influence from business people promoting their own selfish interests, is it any wonder that Starmer and his cronies are toeing the Establishment line, rather than supporting the radical, transformative policies of his forerunner Jeremy Corbyn?

Source: How Starmer Abandoned Left-Wing Economics

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

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right 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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Where will left-wing voters go, now that Keir Starmer has joined the Conservatives?

Tricky times: his right-wing policies mean he is unlikely to be able to form a government on his own – but can Keir Starmer be persuaded to turn left AFTER an election, in alliance with anti-Tory parties?

After Keir Starmer’s announcement that he doesn’t mind if people accuse him of being a Conservative, will voters abandon his version of the Labour Party in search of a new hope?

Starmer’s gamble – and perhaps his fatal flaw – is his belief that socialist, or at least left-wing, voters simply don’t have anywhere to go other than his neoliberal, right-wing party if they want to get the Tories out of office.

Novara Media‘s Aaron Bastani, writing in The Post, reckons he is mistaken:

from the embers of Corbynism, and a seeming ambivalence towards Starmer, an outline for the second half of the 2020s starts to emerge. In it, the Tories collapse — in the Red Wall to Labour and across their own heartlands to the resurgent Liberal Democrats — while the Greens emerge as a serious party across much of England.

I think Bastani himself is mistaken to put any faith in the Lib Dems. Too many of us remember their Coalition with a Conservative Party that could not win a Parliamentary majority on its own in 2010, ushering in the current age of austerity, privatisation, wage suppression and price inflation.

But his vision of a Labour government with little or no Parliamentary majority may still come true, albeit possibly with Independent MPs who Starmer ejected from Labour taking the place of the LDs.

Either way, with Starmer unlikely to win an election outright because his policies are too unpopular, he will be vulnerable to influence from the parties whose support he’ll need if he’s to pass any legislative programme at all.

He’ll have to do some horse-trading, and this means allowing some legislation that the other parties want. This creates an opening to bring in proportional representation again – not via a referendum in which the gullible may be tricked with lies, but by direct legislation. And why not? I don’t recall being given a choice about the voting system in the Welsh Assembly.

As for other policies, it depends how the new Parliament is composed. If the Liberal Democrats gain a significant number of seats, then it may be business as usual for the right-wing Establishment as, apart from a few cosmetic differences, a Lab-Lib coalition or confidence and supply arrangement will be little different from the current Conservative government.

But if left-wing, former Labour representatives gain a serious foothold, then the door may be opened for policies such as re-nationalisation of public utilities. Bastani indicates that Conservative voters want to see the Royal Mail re-nationalised anyway – but if it’s not a Labour manifesto commitment, it won’t earn Starmer any support.

So I reckon it will be for left-wing MPs to sort out with StarmerLabour after the election – if they get the chance.

Then again, Bastani reckons there will be huge pressure on Labour MPs and candidates – before the election – to address issues like the housing crisis.

But how are we supposed to do that?

MPs are easy to contact – they have to carry out regular “surgeries” that are open to the public and that’s how they learn what their voters want. Have you ever been to one? The alternatives are opinion polls, which are generally carried out on a national scale and may not represent what your constituency needs, or the ideas of those who spread their opinions across the letter columns of newspapers.

Representatives of other parties in your constituency are harder to find – or influence. Some may have local offices through which they may be contacted; others may have to be sought via their national headquarters.

But how can you guarantee to influence your party of choice? Labour’s attitude lately is to ignore anybody who isn’t Keir Starmer – and to accuse those who put forward radical alternatives to current party police.

It seems you are unsafe, wherever you go.

This Writer’s advice would be for anyone who is interested in their future – or indeed, in having any future at all – to contact as many of the established parties as possible, to discover their current policy platform.

If none of them conform with what you want – and you should make yourself expressly plain on that – then it will be time to ask someone to stand as an independent, if nobody has already come forward.

Whatever you choose to do, there is a long way to go – especially if you choose to do nothing at all.

And remember:

There is no guarantee that Starmer won’t simply ally Labour with the Conservatives; his lust for power really does seem to be that strong. What will you do then?

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

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right 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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Richard Sharp’s resignation in depth: the taint of Boris Johnson

Influence: Richard Sharp (left) and Boris Johnson.

Here’s an aspect to Richard Sharp’s resignation as BBC Chairman that needs to be more thoroughly examined: his relationship with Boris Johnson and what that former prime minister wanted from the media.

This aspect was explored by James O’Brien on LBC:

The assumption is that Boris Johnson wasn’t happy that the right-wing of politics controls 90 per cent of the media and wanted to put his people in charge of organisations including Ofcom and the BBC, to ensure even more right-wing media dominance.

It suggests that Johnson failed with Ofcom but succeeded with the BBC.

Now take a look at the way the BBC’s Ros Atkins examines the Sharp case:

Again, Johnson is mentioned – but his intention in appointing Sharp is glossed-over. The report comes across as fence-sitting.

Is this an aspect of Sharp’s Tory influence?

If that is even possible, is it right that Sharp remains in post until June, while a new BBC chairperson is interviewed, vetted and appointed?

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

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right 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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Tory chairman apologises to civil service for ‘activist blob’ email. Why not Braverman?

Greg Hands: I’d forgotten I had this duff graphic that approximates his image. I suits what he’s done here, though.

Suella Braverman said she wouldn’t apologise to civil servants for saying they blocked her bid to stop Channel migrants coming to the UK in an email to Tory supporters – and she hasn’t.

It was left to party chairman Greg Hands to do it instead.

The email, in Braverman’s name, sent by Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) to party members, said the following:

“We tried to stop the small boats crossings without changing our laws.

“But an activist blob of left wing lawyers, civil servants and the Labour Party blocked us.”

Dave Penman, general secretary of the FDA Union, which represents civil servants, stated in a letter to prime minister Rishi Sunak that it was “a direct attack on the integrity and impartiality of the thousands of civil servants who loyally serve the home secretary, doing some of the most complex and difficult work in government”.

Penman also said Braverman may have broken the ministerial code, which says ministers must “uphold the impartiality of the civil service”.

Braverman disowned the email, despite the fact that it went out under her name.

She told Robert Peston: “I didn’t write that email, I didn’t see it and it was an error that it was sent out in my name.”

Nevertheless, her name was attached to it and for that reason alone, she had an apology to make. She should have been paying attention to what was being said in her name. She didn’t.

Instead, we hear that the head of the civil service, Simon Case, has written to the PCS union to say that Hands has apologised for the “error”:

“He assured me that he has already taken action to change procedures in CCHQ to make sure that there is not a repeat of this incident,” the head of the civil service said.

Hands has also “provided his assurance that attacks on the civil service are not part of any standard CCHQ lines”, Case added.

It’s not enough, is it? It’s just a proxy apology from a civil servant to a civil service union. Where’s the full and frank apology and explanation from the Home Secretary?

Source: Simon Case: Conservative Party chair has apologised for ‘activist civil servants’ email

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

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right 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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

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:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Why is the EHRC letting Labour get away with overtly anti-Semitic expulsions of Jews?

Please share the image, or even tweet it to @Keir_Starmer if you like it.

Those of us who have taken to watching the anti-Semitism of Keir Starmer’s Labour Party from outside can only gape appalled at the latest announcement from the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

According to that body, it is satisfied that Labour has made enough changes to the way it handles complaints of anti-Semitism to counter the criticisms it made of how the party handles anti-Semitism complaints and will be winding up a two-year monitoring process.

You can read more about that here.

But you’ll also need to be aware that since Keir Starmer took over as party leader, Labour has embarked on a programme (or should that be pogrom) of removing Jews from the party – specifically targeting Jewish people with left-wing views.

Here‘s a report from December last year, on the removal of three high-profile left-wing Jews. All anti-racists, they were accused of anti-Semitism.

Notice that, in this report, Heather Mendick commented that “her branch used to have ‘lots of active Jewish members’. All were ‘lefties’ but just one of them is still a member.”

How about the resignation from Keir Starmer’s own Constituency Labour Party of Stephen Kapos, a Holocaust survivor who the party told must choose between his duty to teach people about its horrors and Labour policy demanding he may not support a group that has been proscribed by the party (albeit for questionable reasons)?

Others who have been forced out include:

Jo Bird

Leah Levane

Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi

And the Jews named in this article (which I’m aware includes some of those mentioned above).

It has been claimed that Jewish Labour members are almost five times more likely to face anti-Semitism charges than non-Jewish members.

But against this background of shockingly anti-Semitic behaviour, Starmer has issued an ultimatum to all remaining left-wing Labour members: support him or leave.

The BBC reports him saying:

“We are never going back. If you don’t like it, nobody is forcing you to stay.”

What a horrifying message for Jewish members of the Labour Party.

Starmer is saying that he will continue to purge them from their political home; to deny them a voice; to remove their identity (shades of Germany in the 1930s).

And their only alternative is to leave before they are forced out.

And that is what the euphemistically-named Equality and Human Rights Commission is praising.

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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

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:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook