What is Starmerism? Labour's first King's Speech | The News Agents
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 жов 2024
- Keir Starmer promised "national renewal" in today's King's Speech, where he outlined his policy plans for the next parliament.
So did we get our first glimpse of what Starmerism might look like? Is the state back? And do we now have the most interventionist government for decades?
Later in the show we return to Milwaukee and the Republican Party National convention. Emily is there speaking to senior party figures and asking where all the traditional Republicans have gone, as Trump and his acolytes take over the GOP.
#keirstarmer #labour #labourparty #uk #kingcharlesiii #milwaukee #republicannationalconvention #republicans #joebiden #democrats #donaldtrump #ukpolitics #uspolitics #uspresident #News #Politics #NewsAgents #EmilyMaitlis #JonSopel #LewisGoodall
Download The News Agents with Emily Maitlis, Jon Sopel and Lewis Goodall from 5PM every weekday on Global Player: www.globalplay...
Emily Maitlis, Jon Sopel and Lewis Goodall - three of the UK’s top journalists - host a brand-new daily news podcast: The News Agents.
They’re not just here to tell you what's happening, but why. Expect astute analysis and explanation of the day's news - and a healthy dose of scepticism and the ability to laugh at it all when needed!
Episodes are available every weekday afternoon.
The News Agents is a Global Player Original podcast.
Labour may not have introduced it Phillipson, but they inherited it, so it is a Labour policy now. You don't need a task force to tell you it needs to be scrapped.
I agree it should be scrapped, but it's wildly popular therefore Labour need to explain *why* it's better to scrap it before getting rid.
@@31Blaize Because in respect of the uplift to children, compared to the actual cost (£230-260M) it's a no-brainer. Utterly ridiculous. 1st mistake of the Labour government.
@@31Blaize I have seen no evidence that the policy is popular. Political leadership is not about giving what the people want all the time and follow popularity, but about giving them what they need. This policy is abhorrent and the party will damage themselves if they don't remove it
@@Duggi311 Once again: the majority of voters in the UK support the cap for whatever reason (you should be able to find some polls on it if you search). Politics is not about imposing your will on the electorate: that's what dictators do. It's about explaining to the public why you need to change things and bringing them with you.
Hope you 3 get much more than 70k subscriptions soon. Easily my favourite way to get news
Are you not a discerning person?
That was award-winning avoiding the question from Phillipson regarding the benefit cap
It seems like the poverty task force was quickly assembled because of the growing internal backlash
But Pat McFadden’s comments that it’s up for debate whether the cap is causing harm, makes me wonder if Labour do actually support it to some level
After the award winning Tory party that brought in measures to ensrine child poverty.
Reading between the lines I think they hope to slam into reverse subsidising low pay with benefits. If they lift the two child cap they'll just be accused of upping the benefit bill. Hardly any of the benefits bill goes to people sitting on their backsides. Most goes to the state pension, landlords (extortionate rents equals extionate housing benefits bill) and huge amounts of subsidies for people raising children via what was tax credits (which used to be awarded without a conditionality and is now under universal credit very much a conditional benefit) because so many of the population would be unable to provide a home and raise a family without government support. That's the model that's failed, it isn't "too many people on benefits", it's "too many employers expect to run a business" and make money but don't pay enough to live on, especially while trying to raise a family. Something has to give. Both parents work full time while the government pays someone else to childcare the children. Also fit in all the elder care duties and admin that's been passed down to people via supposedly convenient technologies. It's all a treadmill to exhaustion. Now the Tories want people to have more British born children when they've presided over an economy which just works for the few. I'm wondering if Starmer and Reeves are actually beginning to prepare the ground for the relationship between employer and employee to be the basis of the economy and not the benefit system. Trouble is so many are now used to this model. Just wondering.
What a terrible, snobbish way to look at the world.
Why is it suggested that this King's Speech has to include every manifesto pledge? There's going to be at least another four speeches of this nature in the years to come and surely other manifesto pledges could be included then?
Because the first one often reflects their intent over a whole term.
@@HomemadeBrownies1 Thanks, I appreciate that view. I think I personally get frustrated with the media narrative that Labour governments have to always be seen to be doing more. By not including everything in one go it gives the impression that the government somehow is lacking intent, when they clearly have the most interventionist agenda in a generation (which I'm more than happy with 😊) and as a start that isn't lacking at all.
It's unbelievable that a government does not think that the state needs transport, power, water and communications. In addition to this we need materials to maintain independence. Steelworks is just one of these. I think all of these should be protected and 51% state owned.
The equivalent of the King’s Speech would be the State of the Union
It is literally the constitutional analogue. Surprised Sopal said that.
Exactly. The President even has to ask the Sergeant at Arms for permission to enter the House, reflecting the way that Black Rod needs to knock to be allowed into the Commons.
Very disappointing she would not give a straight answer on the benefits cap. There must be better ways to give a non-committal answer.
Or just be honest. It's bizarre more people aren't up in arms about how politicians never answer the question how is it posed or at all. We'll never have any idea how to proceed if they just continue the interview when it's clear the politicians outright refuse the premise. Very frustrating and pointless to watch tbh
@@johnnettey and now she’s been made to look daft by Starmer who has been forced to agree to “review” the cap, thanks to backbencher pressure.
Here we go bang on against a Labour Minister in a way you never questioned a Tory Minister.
You're spot on
I love seeing politicians blatantly fail to answer a question -"Is it desirable to lift the cap?"
We didn't implement the policy
It's almost comical 😂
Very disappointing. I thiught we had seen the end of that type of behaviour. Surely it should be possible to say “Yes, it is desirable, but we can’t promise when this can be done.”
@@richardjakobek7477 it's expected behaviour to me - none-answers are a politician's lifeblood and off the cuff questions where every answer will be noted down and critiqued in future if not upheld make all politicians overly risk averse.
My thing is though, as you imply - this was a really low ball question I think someone could have palmed off with a slightly better none answer
I mean, a politician isn't going to announce - essentially - policy, off-the-cuff in an interview.
@@jackayers4955 Oh absolutely - I fully understand the motive behind dodging the question but that doesn't stop it being nigh surreal to see it shown so apparently.
I feel like you may have been replying to the other persons point though but nevermind
It's all part of the same dance, you don't get ministers announcing their preferred policy priorities outside of what has been cleared with no.10. If she did say that, then the question is when they will do it, and that's putting a gun to your own head.
(It should have been a manifesto pledge, if you ask me, but it wasn't, so there's currently nothing to hold them to on that.)
This is the second interview I've seen her in where she comes across as a bit prickly. Maybe Rayner can help her out.
Another politician who is physically unable to answer YES or NO
Starmer.
Dr Do Little.
State is back, back again, state is back, tell a friend...
🎯 Key points for quick navigation:
00:28 *🎩 Labour's first King's Speech in 15 years*
03:11 *📜 The King's Speech lists government legislation*
08:26 *🏗 Starmerism is an interventionist government*
10:18 *💷 Starmerism combines old and new labour approaches*
14:40 *🏠 Housing policy focus to tackle shortage*
15:37 *🍽 Universal free breakfast clubs for primary schools*
18:07 *🗳 Promise to lower voting age to 16*
20:03 *🔍 Clarification on staff role from Education Secretary*
20:43 *🔍 US-UK relationship goes beyond individuals, will work with any US leader.*
21:39 *📜 King's Speech without a budget impacts government's agenda.*
22:50 *🤔 Labor ministers uncertain about responding to fiscal questions without a budget.*
26:59 *🎭 Shift in Republican Party towards Trump's influence, marginalizing others.*
28:46 *🇺🇸 Trump's focus and determination for re-election highlighted at convention.*
29:43 *💬 Republican party seen as unified behind Trump, ready for a new vision for America.*
The thing about land is that there is soooooo much green space, green development for local affordable houses for people who live or work locally should be acceptable to communities. There are laws to do that sort of thing and is happening. It will be impossible to build on every green space so people need to be less threatened by this. It would also help the quality of schools, young families to stay in areas and also connection with older people.
Not wishing to appear a NIMBY, but allowing expansion of development into greenfield sites often tends to create car dependent, soulless suburbs lacking a sense of community and essential infrastructure. Intensification of development existing urban areas and brownfield sites should always be the first choice. Where greenfield development is necessary then it must ensure that proper communities are built, with necessary infrastructure, including transport options apart from the motor car.
Yes! X
The thumbnail for this video makes poor Lewis look like someone who’s ‘been through some things’ …
Lewis's hair has a life of it's own. Shortly he will look like Trump but today it is an Elvis impersonator.
@@SomchaiSpeaks...with a bad toupee 😂
Jon, the kings speech is yes a bit anarchronistic NOTHING like the RNC or anything they do over there with the weirdos and crackpots. Its certainly more stable and peaceful than that circus
Hilarious how NIMBYs are the first to complain that their children / grandchildren can't afford to buy a house.
Doesn't answer the question on child benefit candidly:
"Can't believe a minister wouldn't commit to a straight answer"
Candidly answers a question about Vance:
"Oh that was very inexperienced. How could a minister answer a question so honestly"
Grow up
I'm sorry Phillipson, but it's a CHOICE to keep the 2 child benefit cap, plain and simple. Yes other things would have to go in order to scrap it (very little btw), but as long as you make that choice you're just WRONG on every level. It's disgraceful.
IMO the child benefit cap not being lifted is because
a) tories left some kind of trap attached to it
b) labour is somehow benefiting from this
c) since it was not worded as 'removing / lifting the cap' on their manifesto, they think they can get away with it if things improve otherwise
Why is this the 1st Labour incoming King's speech since 45? Presumably an incoming Queens Speech. in '97 does not count?
A King is a King, not a Queen.
Are you old enough to vote?
It is the first time since 1945 that a Labour government had a King (George VI) as monarch to deliver a state opening of parliament speech. Subsequent Labour governments were under Queen Elizabeth II
Same old same old... unwilling to answer straight questions, just more spin.
Mission led refers to mission led economics i.e. Mazzucato / Bidenomics
Come on News Agents...
Is there any evidence that “failed railways” which have been taken back into public ownership are running “better” than when they were privatised?
Starmerism is actually just center right austerity which is what we got with Cameron and Osbourne. Pretending otherwise is just disingenuous.
@17:12 Sorry but Philipsons blatant refusal to answer the simple 2 child cap question employing the offensive political tactic of ignoring the question and just repeating their chosen talking point ("We didn't introduce it"), a talking point that was clearly noted in the question, was deeply insulting. I'm sick of these politicians treating us like fools or nobodies. It's especially galling for a state educated MP that didn't take PPE at Oxford to be employing these slimey tactics.
Makes you wonder if Labour secretly support it. After all Liz Kendall in 2015 was the only Labour leadership candidate who supported benefit freezes and she is now in charge of benefits
17:59 stop brow beating she obviously can't answer the question.
Surely Tony Blair had an incoming kings speech? Isn't there one every year?
(so others as well, but Blair was my first UK PM, so the others are more obscure to me)
Queens speech I guess
There was a Queen back then, so it was a Queen's Speech
Not an INCOMING speech. But a Queens speech every year after 1997.
Adults in poverty is equally as bad…but ‘we will govern in a responsible way’ is giving ‘Sorry we can’t lift children out of poverty but we can’t afford it, oh by the way we get our canteen subsidised’
So basically Starmerism is not being able to answer a straightforward question.
As you both know full well, Labour said before the election that they would not end the two child benefit cap. You know that they said it becaue it's a totemic issue for a lot of voters, who hate "benefit scroungers". And you know that ending the 2CBC would mean breaking Labour's commitment to those voters.
You asked a dishonest question and get stonewalling in return, as you expected, and then beefed about it, Pathetic. Just Pathetic.
Sell the Post Office, pays to lift the 2 child cap....let's be fair less kids in poverty and the post will get more reliable..
That was privatised in 2013, last shares sold of in 2015. What do you want to sell?
@@LeafHuntressdon’t you love it when people argue for privatisation of monopoly because of the problems caused by privatisation of monopolies?
@@LeafHuntress fair point
@@LeafHuntress Just remembered that was Royal Mail. Post office still govt owned. 🤪
TBC Tory Broadcasting Corporation
?
HAHAHA what a take that is! You couldn't be further from the truth.