- cross-posted to:
- nottheonion@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- nottheonion@lemmy.world
Keir Starmer has said he is “up for the fight” of defending the “nanny state” as he announced plans to improve child health under a Labour government, including supervised toothbrushing in schools.
The Labour leader said that children were “probably the biggest casualty” of the Tories’ sticking-plaster approach to politics over the past 14 years, adding that, if the government were a parent, they could be charged with neglect.
“I know that we need to take on this question of the nanny state,” he told reporters. “The moment you do anything on child health, people say ‘you’re going down the road of the nanny state.’ We want to have that fight.”
Ahead of a visit to a children’s hospital, Starmer criticised the Tories’ record on child health. “They’re probably the biggest casualty of sticking-plaster politics in the last 14 years,” he said. “Frankly, if parents had treated children as badly as the UK government has, they would probably be charged with neglect. It’s that bad.”
Labour: prioritising the real problems.
It’s so depressing watching how Starmer’s main priority is to avoid doing or committing to any substantive change at all.
He really is doing his best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
And yet I also see people saying he’s doing too much, going too far in the wrong direction, and I bet if he committed to any change right now people would be saying that he’s going too far left and alienating the center-left voters, saying he’s a communist etc. The British public won’t vote for a hard left labour leader as we saw with Corbyn. Something palatable needs to be presented for labour to win
Completely agree. Anything deemed too much and he’ll be dancing at the Cenotaph and supporting the IRA (or something).
Corbyn has joined the South African contingent in defending Palestinian civilians against genocide. Starmer won’t even condemn Tory prosecution of Just Stop Oil protesters.
People on the Left reward conviction and principles. We show up and fight for leaders who inspire us toward a better future. Maybe Starmer can still win without our support, but what indeed will any of us “win” if he does?
Not having the tories. it’s a lot harder for them to get rid of labour again once they’re already in and a lot easier for them to get more leftist policies in
That’s a lot of faith to place in a leader and party who have shown zero evidence of principle or conviction.
Well what’s the alternative? You require more faith to think green will get in, lib dems are tory lite and voting for the tories would just be stupid.
Of course not. No, you vote for parties who want the same things you do, to remind Labour that your vote isn’t a forgone conclusion. So long as they can count on your vote by simply being “not Tory” that’s all you’ll ever get.
The idea of huge changes worked well for the last guy.
You mean the guy advocating for changes this country desperately needed? You’re right, let’s only have leaders bent on doing nothing.
I’d rather someone elected who can make small positive changes than someone who can’t get elected, but stands for huge changes.
The last two attempts at the latter didn’t work, let’s try something pragmatic.