Jon Moses

France, Germany and UK urge Iran to ‘negotiate solution’ after attack Rare joint statement from leaders of European nations makes clear they did not participate in US-Israeli strikes

"The Iranian regime must understand that it now has no other option but to engage in good-faith negotiations"

Yes, the US and Israel are now famous for their good-faith approach to negotiations.

Honestly, what is this statement? Did a Starmer write this?

www.theguardian.com/world/2026/f...

Well, no, they’re not just as wrong. The bigger error is not seeing that “trying to win over voters from a party on the opposite end of the spectrum, whose values your core voters oppose” is not same as “chasing voters from party on same side ideologically whose values your core voters like.”

Very clear that for Starmer, 'sectarian voting' is when British Muslims don't vote Labour, and for many others, it is just when British Muslims vote.

Presumably that will also be much strengthened now, as people become confident insurgent parties can win.

By contrast it seems Reform vote is, so far, quite accurately dialled.

Also interesting to see if YouGov et al start adjusting their models.

Sure, some contingent circumstances in Gorton & Denton (not least a superb candidate) but even so, anti-Labour left vote seems underpriced. See also: Caerphilly by election (which had Plaid five points lower a week before).

I think it fails to understand the coalition of voters that just voted Green, and why. And as usual you won’t get very far by implicitly slagging off the voters. The Green voter coalition was your coalition five minutes ago.

It does feel like a robot programmed with one mode: kick the left. No matter the circumstances. I guess this is what happens when your politics becomes more obsessed by factionalism than analysis & proposition.

There are/were some good Labour MPs & advisers. They just don't get promoted, or leave.

I’m afraid this letter shows why so many Labour MPs think Starmer needs to go. His political antenna is non-existent. If you have just been humbled in a by-election it might not be the best idea to slag off the choices of the voters who deserted you in their droves.

‘Our own people hate us’: reality check for Labour as 13,000 majority vanishes Party billed it as a two-horse race with Reform but Greens’ Hannah Spencer connected with voters in a way it could not

What stands out in this is the gulf between the Prime Minister & Labour HQ and its MPs.

MPs were spelling out in private how mind-bogglingly disastrous the official attack lines were. Yet no one with power within the party was capable of perceiving the obvious.

www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

Yeah but that's quite a different thing to be able to handle a pulpit in the midst of a national media scrum after you've probably slept about six hours in six days. People think 'I could do that'. But they can't.

Quite funny that Hannah Spencer was chilling as a plumbing influencer about a month ago.

Now it seems she's already better at politics, speech writing, and public speaking than the Prime Minister and most of his team.

And she could sort your pipes and walls out. Impressive.

I'm a rural bloke and I don't forgive Labour for promising right to roam and then bottling it. They are in the pockets of the rich and powerful. They have wasted the generational chance to improve society for the majority and have lost this lifelong voter for good. Going Green.

make u think

I still can't get over Starmer's response. It's extraordinary.

It basically amounts to: "I fucking hate you, normal progressive voter, you swivel-eyed lunatic. Now back my party or risk successfully stopping Reform."

This is not a reasoned political response. Labour has spent two years making all the voting groups who backed the Greens feel unwelcome and unheard, and now attacks them for daring to back someone else. They believe Labour isn’t listening and Starmer seems determined to prove them right

Labour MPs press for right to roam policy in England after supreme court ruling Backbencher says ‘it’s time to resolve the issues of access to the English countryside once and for all’

Sure, some excellent Labour MPs have not been letting the issue lie. And DEFRA have committed to exploring options for reform through a Green paper (but no timetable on that).

But where's the leadership? This stuff is a completely unforced capitulation to the powerful.

Still, in the end, it opted to side with some of the wealthiest people in Britain against the interests of millions of ordinary people. Only a few years after a pandemic in which gross inequalities in access to nature were front and centre of our minds.

Hard to disagree with @labourlewis.bsky.social's assessment.

You couldn't really get a better policy for Labour than a right to roam: massive cross-party majorities, polls beautifully with almost every demographic except major landowners). Cheap to implement. A core part of its heritage as a party.

"We talk tough but govern timid. We protect vested interests when we should be taking them on."

Reminded of the time Labour backtracked on committing to a right to roam. They didn't have the courtesy to tell us. Instead they announced it at a conference of the wealthiest landowners in Britain 🤷‍♂️

Yvette Cooper is this close to proscribing the Green Party as a terrorist organisation.

This really is bizarre stuff. And parroting the Reform sectarian stuff.

Who is this for? Who is it going to persuade? How do they imagine it will get any purchase against a candidate like Spencer?

I know his Comms person has just resigned (again) but how are his own instincts this poor?

Shambles.

I mean, that is the implication? Could they really not find someone better among their hundreds of MPs than resurrecting a b-lister from the New Labour years, who speaks in football pundit platitudes?

It's also just... not a plausible response to a swing this historic? This is a red alert, screaming in your ear with a megaphone sort of result. Not just another humdrum by election defeat for a ruling party.

Labour's Douglas Alexander: "we need to move further and faster in delivering the change that people want to see" [repeat x2]

Why do politicians say this kind of thing? Why weren't you already going far & fast with the change you know people want to see?

What was stopping you? What does this mean?

Yes, I predict this kind of stuff will start getting dropped as their policy work matures.

The global movement towards a public health approach to substance use disorders Drug misuse is a global problem. Markets that supply illegal drugs often span international borders. However, each country has different primary drugs of use, populations that are using and consequences of use. The policy approach of each country to ...

Their drug policy is perfectly reasonable imo, and in line with policy shifts around the world. If Labour have an issue with it they should debate the substance. Presenting it as a crank position won't work.

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...

Hard to argue focusing on cost of living and majoring on values hasn't been successful so far. My hope is that they will increasingly start to bridge the social and the environmental, which isn't hard to do if they find the right issues. And Lab have also proved a massive disappointment on nature.

Yes, it hasn't been thought through. But then Zack has been leader for about five minutes and the party doesn't have much policy infrastructure yet. I would also, obviously, like them to be making more of their environmental credentials - that's also what makes them electable in the countryside...

I do think the Greens need a much more clear and realistic position on foreign policy. But their core view re: removing dependency on the US is hardly controversial anymore.

The 'public health' approach to drug addiction is normal progressive politics. Turning it into an attack line will backfire.

Starmer's charm offensive begins...

By branding the Greens "extremists".

What constituency is he even chasing anymore?