Keir Starmer's speech ; or, we need to talk about Brexit

Starmer's speech was a promising start. Corbynites will criticise him for not being Corbynite: well (surprise, surprise) he never pretended to be one. It is like criticising a piece of cheese for not being chalk: it's factually true, but utterly irrelevant. It was clear from the inception of his leadership that he was going to take the Labour Party in a different direction from that of Corbyn, and those who profess to be surprised and shocked don't have the ability to read between the lines of political statements, an essential skill in political analysis. The things that were not said during the Labour leadership contest were more important than those that were, and that is true of much political rhetoric.

He made it clear that austerity made the country extremely ill prepared for the pandemic ; and that social inequalities made matters worse. Some may criticise him for having taken so long to point this out: however, as I pointed out in a blogpost in June or July 2020, he had to make sure that Labour was being heard before he made these points. This perspective on the crisis is important because it effectively counters the government's argument that, because the crisis was 'unprecedented', thousands of deaths were unavoidable and that, therefore, the government should be above criticism. This argument is very plausible (indeed, a great many people believe it), but it is at best a half-truth shielding a lie. His proposals for national bonds, to assist in economic recovery, is politically astute. It takes note of the economic fact that the taxable capacity of the economy is being diminished both by Brexit and the pandemic ; and of the stubborn political fact of the (apparent) unwillingness of many of the more affluent to pay more tax. So he is appealing to their patriotic instincts. If Labour's patriotic turn leads to similarly promising policy initiatives, it may be for the good. If this plan is not as ambitious as many (including myself) had hoped for, that is a reflection of the very difficult position in which the Labour Party still finds itself.

The subject that was not mentioned was, of course, Brexit. Starmer has apparently issued an edict which forbids the PLP from mentioning Brexit in Parliament, as he is fearful of alienating potential voters in the so-called 'red wall' constituencies. This position is untenable. The Brexit agreement of December 2020 was not an end but a beginning, as is signified by Lord Frost taking on a full time role in government dealing with the consequences of his own ill-conceived agreement (At least he is charged with clearing up his own mess, which is always gratifying to see). The malign consequences of Brexit are accumulating, whether for both parts of the island of Ireland, the constitutional stability of the United Kingdom, or for many businesses. It would not only be ridiculous, but a complete dereliction of duty, for the opposition not to hold the government to account on this. The issue is going to force itself on our national attention, sooner rather than later, whether Starmer deems it an appropriate subject of discussion or not.