Thursday, July 3, 2025

Was Rachel Reeves weeping for the failure of her political project, or for the shame of knowing it was never worth fighting for in the first place?

It now appears (although we'll have to wait for people's memoirs to know for sure) that Rachel Reeves' tears at PMQs yesterday may have been triggered by something that loveable ol' Lindsay Hoyle said to her.  But when it seemed more likely that she was weeping for the political failure of both herself and the Labour government, and in particular for the gutting of the welfare reform legislation, I couldn't help but think it perfectly summed up the tragedy of the modern Labour party.  To try to transform society for the better, and to fail, as many progressive politicians have done in the past, would be something to take immense pride in.  But to be so bereft because you betrayed everything your party once was by trying to make life worse for the most vulnerable people, and were thwarted, speaks to a kind of hollowing out of the British left's soul, which will leave Reeves' generation of Labour ministers with a sense of total emptiness when they reach the end of their careers.  What they fought for wasn't worth having and they didn't get it anyway.  I suppose the flipside is that the flame of Labour values does continue to burn, albeit as no more than a dull flicker, among the wider PLP - but unfortunately the only positive practical effect of electing a Labour majority to parliament is that it might sometimes be able to resist the right-wing excesses of the very Labour government that it pointlessly sustains in office.

There was an extraordinary quote on Tuesday from an anonymous Labour loyalist, attacking the welfare rebels: "What did they think the job was? They all think they're JFK because they delivered some leaflets while Morgan McSweeney won them the election."  If the job description of Labour MPs has been revised from creating a fairer society to total unthinking loyalty to the unelected Morgan McSweeney, then I think it's high time this modern day JFK was subjected to some proper public accountability, because I'm not sure I've ever even heard the sound of his voice.  I presume he still has a southern Irish accent, which would be rather jarring given what he's come to represent.  On the face of it, he strikes me as a total political dud, for three reasons -

* He forced Labour to abandon all of its values on the premise that doing so would increase the party's popularity, but ended up with roughly the same share of the vote that Jeremy Corbyn took in 2019, and a significantly lower share of the vote than Corbyn took in 2017.

* His strategic advice has led to the Starmer government's popularity plummetting further and faster than any other newly elected government in British history.

* He purged the PLP as best he could of all free thinkers and replaced them with drones to ensure that his right-wing programme would face no substantive resistance, and yet the Starmer administration with its landslide majority has still ended up functioning like a minority government that cannot carry its business without negotiations and massive concessions.

Now that really is political failure.  To misquote Senator Lloyd Bentson: "Morgan, you're no Jack Kennedy...although let's hear what your voice sounds like just to be sure."

16 comments:

  1. 48 year old McSweeney’s contribution seriously predates 4th July 2024. He was running the smear campaign against Jeremy Corbyn from Labour Party HQ, partly at the behest of the Intelligence Services of the rogue, terrorist state on the Eastern Mediterranean coast.
    Aged 46, McSweeney whose employment history consists entirely of being a backroom functionary for the Labour Party (except for a stint as a labourer on building sites) purchased a £750k holiday home in Lanarkshire.
    Perhaps he won the Irish Lottery?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Morgan McSweeney is married to Imogen Walker MP, who won the Hamilton and Clyde Valley constituency for Labour last year. According to her Register of Interests, she received a donation of £15,000 in 2024 from Gary Lubner, who is a major donor to the wider Labour party and is a prominent pro-Israel lobbyist and donor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Imogen Walker is also parliamentary private secretary to Rachel Reeves.

      Delete
  3. The party of neoliberal transfer of wealth to the already wealthy and the intelligence services of another state with increasingly fascistic methods.
    Well done Keir and chums - some legacy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sturgeon's husband Murrell ex SNP Chief Exec is claiming benefits despite having a villa in Portugal and two decades of substantial income as SNP Chief Executive and could afford to loan the SNP more than £100k. Not to mention his wife Sturgeon having a good income.

    Funny how the lying troll who says it is me who is claiming benefits has nothing to say on the matter. As I have stated previously I do not claim benefits but that has never stopped the lying troll lying his face off. It is obvious that when a sponger is called Murrell or Sturgeon the lying troll is happy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If any person withholds information as to the extent of assets in a legal aid application then that person deserves to be prosecuted for fraud. The SLAB process is normally thorough. If anyone, including Idiot for Scotland, has evidence of someone withholding such information, the evidence should be handed over to the Legal Aid Board. It may of course be that IFS, who remains desperate to be seen as relevant and important, is just doing here what he did with N S. Making unsubstantiated claims, and ultimately being very publicly humiliated and exposed as a liar, his actions fuelled by hatred and resentment. He was posted missing for several days at that time, but his stupidity eventually overcame his temporary embarrassment and back he came, as hate filled and resentful as ever. He can prove me wrong by confirming that he has, and has submitted, the evidence? I’m not holding my breath. Shown to be a complete tit in his N S era, I expect the same will happen here. Poor wee IFSsy. On rainy days like this it must be especially miserable for him, stuck in his wee room. The problem for IFFsy is that lying is his default M O. So if he did ever say something true, who would believe him? Get a job IFSsy.

      Delete
    2. Looks like ifs has annoyed the troll at 3.46pm. Not a good look for a troll to be so easily wound up.

      Delete
    3. Bait taken by the lying troll at 3.46pm. Hook line and sinker.
      You could almost see the foam dripping from his mouth.
      Only 3 out of 10 for that troll. You need to stop repeating your lies and think up some new lies to get higher marks.

      Delete
    4. Hi IFS. How are you? Quite a relaxed and informative post at 3.46, which accounts for your silly comments. Interesting that you don’t contradict or deny anything said. You accept that you/IFS is a liar and an idiot. Oops. Try harder.

      Delete
    5. IFS seems to have a pretty high opinion of himself and thinks nearly everybody but himself is an idiot.

      Delete
    6. IfS the arch deflector.

      Delete
    7. Ifs is just playing about as he has nothing to offer. Did you know he hates Sturgeon ! He really does. Wonder why?

      Delete
  5. I see it is estimated that a new Corbyn/Sultana party would already attract 10% of the UK vote.
    From memory, that is a higher starting point than Reform had.
    Corbyn previously attracted more Labour members and voters when he was leader than Starmer has managed so far, so it is entirely possible that this new party would attract many millions of left of centre voters to their banner, before the next GE.
    It might even manage to eclipse Labour in the same way as Reform has done to the Tory Party.
    That is, of course, if Corbyn actually agrees to form and lead it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question then becomes, has Starmer got the balls and the shred of integrity that would see him push through P R to avoid an outright G E win for right wing parties in coalition? Sadly the answer is no. A modestly successful new party under Corbyn could be a boost for Independence if the message of the true consequences of a Farage influenced govt could be got across to the Scottish electorate. The BBC would do everything in its power to prevent this happening, by outright lies if necessary, unless the SNP had the guts to challenge and thwart them through legal process and a campaign of civil disobedience in and around the BBC buildings. Corbyn may have handed us a way forward here.
      I don’t expect anyone in the SNP to speak of or act on it.




      Delete
    2. Nope, don't think the new party will poll anywhere near 10%. More like 2% to 4% range, would be my guess. A harmful irritant to Labour, no more than that - but that would still be very significant as Keir's lot can't afford to lose yet more voters.

      Delete
  6. Will the new Sultana / Corbyn party gain much traction in Scotland? Probably not much, but at the almost exclusive expense of “Scottish” Labour? If they secure say 3% nationally that may well translate to zero constituency HR seats and probably zero list ones, boosting other parties (Tories, Reform, Greens and LibDems) list prospects whilst decreasing Lab prospects. SNP under this scenario largely unaffected in terms of their limited list hopes, but would boost them over Lab in the few constituencies Lab still have even a puncher’s chance of holding.

    ReplyDelete