KEIR Starmer has been quoted as saying that if elected, he wants two terms, presumably requiring the first five years to stem the flow of Tory mismanagement via Labour’s paler shade of austerity, and then five more to achieve what exactly? And how?
In all the noise between the two party frontrunners, how quickly and quietly Labour sidelined, dumb downed or plain jettisoned their five priorities: “growth, making Britain a clean energy superpower, taking back our streets, breaking down barriers to opportunity and building an NHS fit for the future.” When a party seeks your votes, shouldn’t they flesh out these headline-grabbers into detailed, costed policies?
Presumably you’d require to factor in those old-fashioned essentials: money, resources, possibly even trying to build third-sector partnerships, or scene-setting with local councils and unions in mind. So what exactly is the Labour plan to invest in the “economy”, and how will they kick-start growth?
READ MORE: Scottish party leaders make final General Election pitches
The identification of the co-conspiracy of silence that both Labour and Tory have adhered to has been confronted by many. Economists, including the likes of Paul Krugman (The National, Jul 1), are unimpressed and warning about Labour and their opaque plans. But when Labour’s Pat McFadden recently admitted there are more than 200 taxes that could be employed, on one hand, whilst denying increases on the other, then it’s smoke-and-mirrors time again from Labour.
In turn, how ironic post-Brexit that now there is such commonality between rUK and France. There’s a desire for change being evidenced without deep thought of the consequences by voters in both countries.
Labour and National Rally have redesigned themselves to be elected first and foremost. Labour haven’t put forward a programme to deliver the required social and political change that people need: those relying on food banks, those whose mortgages went through the roof, or those who wait in corridors or in ambulances. And Marine Le Pen has redesigned NF to be sufficiently respectable for the middle classes to vote for them. Now that is change!
READ MORE: 'Worrying': Almost half of voters think polling card is sufficient ID
I refuse to believe that every French voter now supporting Le Pen is a covert racist, and was every Brexiteer here in Scotland voting on the basis of race? People then, and more so now, are desperate for change. Change was identified on the side of a bus, then we had the slogan to finish the change process by getting Brexit done, and now Labour, with no cunning plan, cut to the chase, strip it all away and just go for “change”.
What is truly frightening is the realisation of how far that change could go. We have seen Labour veer right and now further right, but how far will they go? Should Le Pen achieve her aims, France will no longer be a cornerstone of the EU. Will France Frexit? How much energy would there be across the EU to “negotiate” with Britain at such a time of change? Hungary, led by the ever-abrasive Orban, has been wooing Austrian and Czech far-right parties. Who’s to say a confident Farage won’t go a-wooing if he and his party gain MPs? All that’s before the USA and Trump. In all of this, how have we failed to convince Scotland that the change we need is independence?
The transformation of Labour is complete, no matter the size of the majority. Starmer has been quoted in his belief that Labour are “progressive” and there’s a need to show “that only progressives have the answers to the challenges that are facing us in this country and across Europe”. It will be a very sad day here if we wake up to find Scotland has voted for a majority of Unionist MPs, as “progressives” and their parties swerve further to the right.
Selma Rahman
Edinburgh
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel