Great piece. Anyone who doubts Starmer’s commitment to going after criminals and seeking justice for victims / the downtrodden should read Baldwin’s recent biography. His MO is to incrementally, relentlessly move towards the outcome that he believes is right, and his judgment is generally pretty sound. He is laser-focused on the ends and does not care much about the means (provided they are within the law). If I sound like a fan boy that’s because I am - I think a lot of people are going to be pleasantly surprised by Starmer in office.
The white working class women raped disproportionately in this country by non whites are the downtrodden. So as more enter the nation, more will happen. Of course us middle class types don’t need to worry. But that’s the fundamentals of labour. Bringing in those who commit disproportionate amounts of rape per capita vs whites
Sorry, it’s now racist to say blacks commit more rape per capita than whites? Ok. It’s fine if you live in a 98% white and wealthy area I suppose. But for those who are in the big cities it’s an issue. It’s not racist to say blacks commit more crime, even when poverty index is also analysed. It’s racist to ignore the fact that working class whites in big cities were raped en masse and still are by gangs of Asian men who tell them that white women are trash. But yes let’s keep ignoring that non whites also commit crime and that just because their victims tend to be working class it doesn’t mean we are too scared to say these statistics.
So why pretend to be progressive if you support a system where the poorer areas always see more crime. Go move amongst them
You won’t. As it’s too comfortable for those in wealthy white areas to care about the working class ones
All races commit crimes. But as we have seen we aren’t allowed to say that Pakistani men rape white girls in northern cities. It’s seen as insensitive
For Elphicke, I really don't understand what she gets out of it, other than kicking Sunak, which she could have easily done by joining Reform. Labour played her brilliantly, and much as I dislike being in the same party as someone like her I was also in the party when Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were MPs, so I'll bite my tongue until the election when she dissappears into well deserved obscurity.
After reading your book, which gave me a severe attack of existential angst, reading this and having a labour mayor in North Yorkshire makes me feel better. It's the first time in 36 years that I've voted for someone who actually won an election. Wouldn't it be delicious if Sunak lost his seat?
I appreciate it's not 100% relevant to the article, but I do think a lot of the Elphicke issues could have been mitigated if Labour/she had planned a public apology for her previous comments on sexual assault rather than this being issued as an afterthought (albeit a welcome one) today.
I do agree with your logic, but I also think it's unfortunate that the URL for this article is "labour-is-inching-towards-the-right" when my summary of your article would be "Labour aims to win over more right wing/centrist voters without compromising left wing principles"!
my reservation really was Starmer saying out loud today 'no safe routes'. hope he doesn't mean that. that's an absolutely essential part of a humane and effective approach to this issue. smashing the gangs while not providing any safe routes will literally shove future migrants farther down the shoreline to a more dangerous part of it, from where they'll attempt to make their already dangerous crossing. anyway great piece, cheers
well, they say to govern is to choose, so demonstrating that they can do that is rather more encouraging for those who seek competence in their governments and not just mindless sloganeering or pie in the sky wish lists
What I like about this approach is the shift in rhetoric: no longer about the "illegal" refugees and asylum seekers and attempts to deter them coming, but now about tackling the smugglers, and dealing effecctively with genuine asylum seekers: process the claims, and replacing illegal routes with legal ones.
Great article. Of course, if we were still in the EU, we would have much more control via the Dublin Agreement. Perhaps Starmer shouldn't be so bombastic about not rejoining.
Bloody hell Natalie Elphicke?! I've been in Spain all week and joyfully obviously to the goings on in Westminster (I thoroughly recommend it and copious amounts of sangria) another detractors from a dying party, sure it will grab the headlines but have very little impact on voters or Labour mps. This sums it all up for me "This is what politics entails: a compromise between idealism and pragmatism" I was a self confused idolist in my youth but predictably as my parents did shifted towards the centre in my older age - as my nanna used to say ideology is great until you realise you can't pay the mortgage with it! I've said it so many times on here it's getting silly but it's no less true perfect should never be the enemy of good and with Labour you have a good man at the help of a good party with good practical ideas and good sound knowledge. As a humanist and HR Consultant I would love to hear some real empathy in this "small boat" debate but that would not be pragmatic in an election year. In light of where are now good is good enough for me.
A very good read, thanks. Regardless of our politics the elephant in the room when discussing so called "small boats" is surely climate change.This will lead to an even larger exodus of people seeking the very basics of a secure life elsewhere and a need for others to respond. A huge question for us all.
In line with argument in this piece, but nonetheless sad that Starmer simply blanked the Mirror’s question about safe and legal routes. I hope you’re right that this is the great unspoken part of the policy that will emerge once in government! Given that the vast majority of asylum claims are eventually granted once processed does it not make sense to put in place ways of making such claims safely and legally, possibly in France. That would ‘Stop The Boats’ and destroy the criminal people smugglers business model overnight! Why on earth would anyone pay to risk their lives in a small boat crossing if all they had to do was await a decision on their claim in France?
If the genuine refugees could be diverted into safe and legal routes this would greatly reduce the challenge of the boat crossings - vastly smaller numbers comprising only those who have no genuine asylum claim. Then there’s a question of whether any of these have skills and experience needed by our economy…
I’ve definitely heard Keir Starmer talk about processing refugees “ up country.” Maybe I’m being over optimistic but I took that to mean that refugees would be able to claim asylum without having to go through nightmare journeys across Europe.
*If* we're processing claims quickly, then it becomes practical to do a deal with France where we put an asylum application point somewhere in Pas-de-Calais and co-operate with Ofpra to do UK and French asylum processes in parallel, complete with removal if you fail both; all we need is for the UK process to be faster than the French process so that we can hand over failed applicants to Ofpra for French processing (and deportation from France if they fail the French process).
My man, your faith in Starmer is mind blowing. The second he catches a whiff of a “successful asylum application on the up under Labour” headline he’ll fold in an instant, just as he does with every other vulnerable group who can’t punish him electorally.
Much to be said for Dunt s piece: quite how I might be induced to shake Natalie s hand is a different question but I agree that there is a world of difference between her having a loose remit to advise on housing and her having been given any ministerial or other post in connection with immigration- which I would have fervently opposed- or preposterously given a peerage or knighted.
Why do writers need feel the need to write this sort of hyperbole? To make themselves feel virtuous? It is a sad sham. Of course, once on the sea such migrants are vulnerable, but they themselves determine to set out, especially the economic migrants. There are millions of people living in gruesome conditions all over the world with no choice but to endure them. Indentured labour with their children held ransom for their work; sex workers trafficked, beaten and raped; women, children and old people left behind in the villages that young men abandon. Please think more about your desperate virtue signalling, we are all able to empathise without the nonsensical exaggeration.
Think of all the white working class women they will inevitably rape. Ian diesnt see them as vulnerable. He puts their needs beneath asylum seekers in his hierarchy of who he sees as human
Great piece. Anyone who doubts Starmer’s commitment to going after criminals and seeking justice for victims / the downtrodden should read Baldwin’s recent biography. His MO is to incrementally, relentlessly move towards the outcome that he believes is right, and his judgment is generally pretty sound. He is laser-focused on the ends and does not care much about the means (provided they are within the law). If I sound like a fan boy that’s because I am - I think a lot of people are going to be pleasantly surprised by Starmer in office.
The white working class women raped disproportionately in this country by non whites are the downtrodden. So as more enter the nation, more will happen. Of course us middle class types don’t need to worry. But that’s the fundamentals of labour. Bringing in those who commit disproportionate amounts of rape per capita vs whites
What is your evidence for this ostensibly racist comment?
Sorry, it’s now racist to say blacks commit more rape per capita than whites? Ok. It’s fine if you live in a 98% white and wealthy area I suppose. But for those who are in the big cities it’s an issue. It’s not racist to say blacks commit more crime, even when poverty index is also analysed. It’s racist to ignore the fact that working class whites in big cities were raped en masse and still are by gangs of Asian men who tell them that white women are trash. But yes let’s keep ignoring that non whites also commit crime and that just because their victims tend to be working class it doesn’t mean we are too scared to say these statistics.
So why pretend to be progressive if you support a system where the poorer areas always see more crime. Go move amongst them
You won’t. As it’s too comfortable for those in wealthy white areas to care about the working class ones
All races commit crimes. But as we have seen we aren’t allowed to say that Pakistani men rape white girls in northern cities. It’s seen as insensitive
For Elphicke, I really don't understand what she gets out of it, other than kicking Sunak, which she could have easily done by joining Reform. Labour played her brilliantly, and much as I dislike being in the same party as someone like her I was also in the party when Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were MPs, so I'll bite my tongue until the election when she dissappears into well deserved obscurity.
Perhaps Reform wouldn't have her. She's fairly damaged goods.
After reading your book, which gave me a severe attack of existential angst, reading this and having a labour mayor in North Yorkshire makes me feel better. It's the first time in 36 years that I've voted for someone who actually won an election. Wouldn't it be delicious if Sunak lost his seat?
‘The art of the possible,’ which starts from a realistic assessment of where we are, rather than a fantasy of where some people think we ought to be.
Nice one.
I appreciate it's not 100% relevant to the article, but I do think a lot of the Elphicke issues could have been mitigated if Labour/she had planned a public apology for her previous comments on sexual assault rather than this being issued as an afterthought (albeit a welcome one) today.
I do agree with your logic, but I also think it's unfortunate that the URL for this article is "labour-is-inching-towards-the-right" when my summary of your article would be "Labour aims to win over more right wing/centrist voters without compromising left wing principles"!
Yep - I also clocked that he was talking about the smugglers, not the asylum seekers.
my reservation really was Starmer saying out loud today 'no safe routes'. hope he doesn't mean that. that's an absolutely essential part of a humane and effective approach to this issue. smashing the gangs while not providing any safe routes will literally shove future migrants farther down the shoreline to a more dangerous part of it, from where they'll attempt to make their already dangerous crossing. anyway great piece, cheers
well, they say to govern is to choose, so demonstrating that they can do that is rather more encouraging for those who seek competence in their governments and not just mindless sloganeering or pie in the sky wish lists
What I like about this approach is the shift in rhetoric: no longer about the "illegal" refugees and asylum seekers and attempts to deter them coming, but now about tackling the smugglers, and dealing effecctively with genuine asylum seekers: process the claims, and replacing illegal routes with legal ones.
Great article. Of course, if we were still in the EU, we would have much more control via the Dublin Agreement. Perhaps Starmer shouldn't be so bombastic about not rejoining.
I'm hoping he's merely keeping his powder dry on EU-related issues, and will be a little more bold post election.
Bloody hell Natalie Elphicke?! I've been in Spain all week and joyfully obviously to the goings on in Westminster (I thoroughly recommend it and copious amounts of sangria) another detractors from a dying party, sure it will grab the headlines but have very little impact on voters or Labour mps. This sums it all up for me "This is what politics entails: a compromise between idealism and pragmatism" I was a self confused idolist in my youth but predictably as my parents did shifted towards the centre in my older age - as my nanna used to say ideology is great until you realise you can't pay the mortgage with it! I've said it so many times on here it's getting silly but it's no less true perfect should never be the enemy of good and with Labour you have a good man at the help of a good party with good practical ideas and good sound knowledge. As a humanist and HR Consultant I would love to hear some real empathy in this "small boat" debate but that would not be pragmatic in an election year. In light of where are now good is good enough for me.
A very good read, thanks. Regardless of our politics the elephant in the room when discussing so called "small boats" is surely climate change.This will lead to an even larger exodus of people seeking the very basics of a secure life elsewhere and a need for others to respond. A huge question for us all.
In line with argument in this piece, but nonetheless sad that Starmer simply blanked the Mirror’s question about safe and legal routes. I hope you’re right that this is the great unspoken part of the policy that will emerge once in government! Given that the vast majority of asylum claims are eventually granted once processed does it not make sense to put in place ways of making such claims safely and legally, possibly in France. That would ‘Stop The Boats’ and destroy the criminal people smugglers business model overnight! Why on earth would anyone pay to risk their lives in a small boat crossing if all they had to do was await a decision on their claim in France?
I think they'll have to be pressured into safe routes, fwiw. But that it'll be a damn sight easier to pressure them than the current government.
If the genuine refugees could be diverted into safe and legal routes this would greatly reduce the challenge of the boat crossings - vastly smaller numbers comprising only those who have no genuine asylum claim. Then there’s a question of whether any of these have skills and experience needed by our economy…
They will end up in northern towns raping the working class white minors. For some its the reason why they come under false pretences.
I’ve definitely heard Keir Starmer talk about processing refugees “ up country.” Maybe I’m being over optimistic but I took that to mean that refugees would be able to claim asylum without having to go through nightmare journeys across Europe.
*If* we're processing claims quickly, then it becomes practical to do a deal with France where we put an asylum application point somewhere in Pas-de-Calais and co-operate with Ofpra to do UK and French asylum processes in parallel, complete with removal if you fail both; all we need is for the UK process to be faster than the French process so that we can hand over failed applicants to Ofpra for French processing (and deportation from France if they fail the French process).
My man, your faith in Starmer is mind blowing. The second he catches a whiff of a “successful asylum application on the up under Labour” headline he’ll fold in an instant, just as he does with every other vulnerable group who can’t punish him electorally.
Much to be said for Dunt s piece: quite how I might be induced to shake Natalie s hand is a different question but I agree that there is a world of difference between her having a loose remit to advise on housing and her having been given any ministerial or other post in connection with immigration- which I would have fervently opposed- or preposterously given a peerage or knighted.
‘ the most vulnerable people on earth.’
Why do writers need feel the need to write this sort of hyperbole? To make themselves feel virtuous? It is a sad sham. Of course, once on the sea such migrants are vulnerable, but they themselves determine to set out, especially the economic migrants. There are millions of people living in gruesome conditions all over the world with no choice but to endure them. Indentured labour with their children held ransom for their work; sex workers trafficked, beaten and raped; women, children and old people left behind in the villages that young men abandon. Please think more about your desperate virtue signalling, we are all able to empathise without the nonsensical exaggeration.
Think of all the white working class women they will inevitably rape. Ian diesnt see them as vulnerable. He puts their needs beneath asylum seekers in his hierarchy of who he sees as human