Total Pageviews

Tuesday 17 September 2024

Starmer’s social cruelty. Surprised? You shouldn’t be… (511)

Sighs of relief reached gale-warning levels when the Tories were ousted in July. However, that storm front fast lost its identity as the new reality was battered home by the son of a tool maker (did you know?). No one who understands politics or the sheer social carnage of Conservative maladministration this past decade and a half can have been expecting instant Nirvana. However, what we got, it seems, was a posturing PM who wanted to show he could be tough.

Not sure that’s what the electorate that bothered to turn-out, voted for.

It’s to do with expectation. Somewhere at the back of our minds we still think of Labour as more ‘caring’ than the Tories – despite the dead-eyed stare and forced smile (grimace) of Wes Streeting. Despite the treatment of Diane Abbot (and I’m no fan) by the party she served for decades. Despite the enthusiastic, unnecessary welcoming into the folds of Tory right-wing loon Natalie Elphicke earlier this year. Yes – that Elphicke. Not only extreme right wing but took over her husband’s seat when he was accused of sexual assault. Her defence of him being (and I paraphrase) these women chased him because he’s so gorgeous. – Do look up Charlie Elphicke.

So the clear lack of empathy evident in initial decision making in the early days, the bits folk will remember – have shaken people. An equivalent would be the shockwave that reverberates through society when we learn of a woman involved in extreme physical cruelty to a child. We all know it’s a possibility but deep down it’s something we still on the whole associate with men. Statistically that is a correct supposition.

There were expectations that Starmer’s administration would be more compassionate than a Tory government and Starmer could have made decisions that supported that expectation. He did not.

So – choosing to keep the two-child benefit cap brought us up short – and it was a choice. Scrapping the winter fuel payments to the elderly stuck in our collective craw.

Add that to Labour’s trotting along in the US tail-wind regarding the soft touch on Israel’s ‘Trump’ - Netanyahu for nearly a year now – despite the other 3 nations of the union calling for an immediate ceasefire back when it might have made a difference - and we are already wondering what is going on.

I would argue strongly Starmer’s Labour is acting entirely true to form.

Blair’s New Labour chose to stick to Thatcher’s fiscal programme for two years. It was the Blair administration that introduced tuition fees – crushing generations under debt. It was New Labour that introduced the private sector into NHS and Education infrastructure and of course – it was Blair who served up the tragedy of Iraq, the nightmare that followed and which reverberates today.

But step back further into the mists of time. During the pre-Thatcher Labour years 1974 – 79, £750million worth of shares in BP were sold off, there were extreme public spending cuts and the sell-off of council house stock was sanctioned by the Labour government albeit it the sell-offs happened in Tory-controlled councils.

What I’m saying is – Labour has ‘form’ and I’m not just referring to the last Labour government.

Anyone surprised by Starmer’s Labour needs to dust off some mental cobwebs.

*

Do check out My OTHER STUFF