This morning on LBC, which like ITV fawns over the Labour Right because that is what its big corporate advertisers tellingly now want, Keir Starmer carefully did not say that Britain would have been better off under Jeremy Corbyn. But he would have been right if he had.
The BBC itself admits that the flagship Panorama on Labour anti-Semitism was pack of lies, and public opinion in Britain is rapidly tiring of defeat in Ukraine by a private company that actively recruited dregs, even without mentioning everything that we kept being told that we could not afford at home while we found limitless funds for that.
No McDonnell Budget would have resulted in the economic collapse that the mini-Budget managed to cause even without ever being enacted, and for which we are all going to be paying for the rest of our lives. There would have been no Michelle Mones or Nadhim Zahawis under Corbyn. Corbyn had serious failings. Yet Britain would have been better under him than it is now. That Starmer will not say so is one of the many reasons why he is unfit to be Prime Minister.
But Starmer's dishonesty is becoming a story. He lied to his party members to get their votes, so he would lie to anyone else to get their votes. We are heading for a hung Parliament. To strengthen families and communities by securing economic equality and international peace through the democratic political control of the means to those ends, including national and parliamentary sovereignty, we need to hold the balance of power. Owing nothing to either main party, we must be open to the better offer. There does, however, need to be a better offer. Not a lesser evil, which in any case the Labour Party is not.
Spot on.
ReplyDeleteThank you.
Delete