Don't Vote Labour (Part 2)

Trans issue; Brexit

Trans issue

In June 2021 Starmer said Labour were committed to altering the Gender Recognition Act to allow self-ID to determine whether a person has 'changed sex'. This would cut out the medical element and allow anyone to 'change sex' on their own say so. Needless to say, if this were to happen it would cause huge problems.

In 2023 the SNP government in Scotland attempted to do this. They passed it in the Scottish Parliament with the keen support of Scottish Labour. There was much public backlash already, but when it transpired that Isla Bryson, a male rapist identifying as a woman, had been accommodated in a Scottish women's prison, the issue exploded. Nicola Sturgeon, her career already in trouble, was forced to resign (not the reason she gave of course).

Labour, realising their complicity in the self-ID scandal, backtracked somewhat. Starmer did not comment on whether the UK government should strike the law down, and said he would wait and see. The UK government did quash it, and Starmer made no objection. Later Starmer mused in an interview that under 18s should not have the right to change their sex or gender. He may have held that position before, but didn't publicly say it. To do so now was clear signposting to socially conservative voters, by showing a moderation in his stance.  Now Labour is emphasising it will fight for women's single sex spaces, which is clearly contradicted by its previous policy of changing the GRA.

With the bizarre modern question of 'what is a woman?', the record of Starmer and Labour has been similar. In an especially cringe-inducing interview, a hapless Rachel Reeves could barely reply to the question using words. If a Shadow Chancellor can't answer that basic poser, how are they going to manage complex economics? Starmer has been very mealy-mouthed, making convoluted statements such as 'for 99.9% of women, everything is a matter of biology'. The hardwired lawyer within him has refused to say that a person cannot change sex, while at the same time refusing to out and out state that 'trans women are women'. As with every lawyerly vagary that comes out his mouth, the purpose is to not commit and avoid being called out if he later changes his position. Even with this caution, though, he was still inaccurately saying that 0.1% of women can be men.

Only last year did Starmer manage to say that a woman is an 'adult human female'. This is a radical change compared to the previous nuance, and again is signposting to the socially conservative. However, the lawyer get-out is still there. He hasn't said what a 'female' actually is. He could claim, further down the line, that he assumed a 'trans woman' could be a female.

The answer to 'what is a woman?' should be thus: an adult human female who usually has, at some point in their lives, the ability to conceive, give birth and menstruate, who has a vagina and normally has breasts. This fact is not affected by the tiny number of intersex people whose sex is genuinely indeterminate owing to physical and genetic factors (this is suggested by one study to be as low as 0.018%). There is no reason politicians should struggle with these biological truths.

Even if legally speaking someone can change sex, it is still possible to have a personal opinion as to whether they really *have* changed sex. Fear prevents Starmer from expressing such a stance even if deep down he believes it. Fear also prevents him from fully committing to the radical trans agenda. We don't want leaders that lack courage in this way.

Labour's treatment of their Canterbury MP, Rosie Duffield, has also been the subject of vacillation. Pro-trans lobby Labour supporters have made her life a misery and even threatened her safety. All she has done is refuse to declare a man can become a woman and refuse to compromise on women's rights and safety. Labour HQ moved to deselect her for the general election, announcing this in November 2023. Since then however, they have changed tack and allowed her to remain the candidate. Another Labour MP, Tonia Antoniazzi, recently Tweeted out a graphic in defence of women's single sex spaces. In the past she would have been removed for this, but the fact Labour is now more lenient of such stances is all part of electioneering. It is likely a token gesture to social conservatives - nothing more.

If Labour are truly becoming less 'woke' we should welcome this. But we cannot forget their contradictory policies and lack of courage in the past. They cannot be trusted by social conservatives, and yet again they cannot be trusted as 'allies' by the trans lobby.

Brexit

Starmer and the vast majority of Labour wanted to remain in the EU. When we voted to leave, they tried to block the process. When that failed, they tried to get us to vote again until we gave them the right answer. Starmer was a leading figure in that campaign. He served in Corbyn's cabinet so he could steer Labour's policy in that direction and eventually bounce Corbyn into it. He famously went off script in his 2018 autumn conference speech to press for a second referendum with Remain as an option. This was eventually included in the General Election manifesto the next year.

This was a major factor in the  demolishment of Labour in that election - not just Corbyn and the far left as the ‘Starm-troopers’ would have you believe. Starmer had helped to wreck Labour's chances, and then stood to inherit the leadership when Corbyn resigned. Possibly this was by design, or possibly he isn't that bright and was oblivious to how unpopular the second referendum would be. Perhaps he was the pawn in a larger conspiracy. Either way the result was the same.

Brexit is rather old news now, but to many Leave supporters, including previous Labour voters, Labour's betrayal still rankles. On the biggest constitutional issues of our time, not only were Labour on the wrong side before the vote, but they rejected the result afterwards. How the party behaved between 2016 and 2020 asks serious questions of their integrity and whether they can be trusted. Still the contempt for Brexit regularly surfaces from Labour MPs and supporters, reminding us of what they did.

Starmer has tried to move the focus on, understandably. A thin veneer of 'Brexit is done and we're getting on with it' has been allowed to develop. There is talk of the question being settled for a generation. Starmer even tried to appropriate 'Take Back Control'. Yet we frequently see the Europhilic old man operating the levers behind the curtain. This comes not only from the likes of the fanatical Stella Creasy with her 'Labour Movement for Europe' credentials, but from Starmer himself, who is always talking about us needing to be closer aligned to the EU, to reopen the deal to 'improve' it.  His shadow cabinet is full of ultra-remainers and second referendum merchants - not least David Lammy who likened the ERG to Nazis and the South African apartheid regime. Indeed an audit of Starmer's front bench reveals a vast majority of second referendum supporters and backers of Corbyn's failed 2016 challenger and Sgt Bilko lookalike, Owen Smith.

From the rejoiner side the 'acceptance' of Brexit and the concept of making it work is anathema. Many harangue Labour MPs whenever they say something about the ills of the economy, demanding they commit to rejoining the political bloc as the only viable fix (yeah right). While not sympathising with their position, you can understand why they are upset. Labour led them down the Remain path and then dumped them when it was exposed as electoral kryptonite. However, their protestations are likely just noise - most of them will still vote for Labour. Some even openly back Starmer, despite his position, spreading slogans such as 'in Keir we trust'. They recognise he has to wriggle his way to power, and are hoping when it comes to the crunch he will betray Leave voters instead of them.

I am afraid they may be vindicated in that Machiavellian thinking. I believe Labour is a not-so-secret sleeper cell for Rejoin. If they won't rejoin in name, they will rejoin in practice, with ever closer alignment that hobbles our sovereignty, and plots our route back should conditions allow for it. It will be done in the name of economics, of trade efficiency - the only significant argument the pro-EU side ever had.

That reason alone will forbid this former Labour voter from ever supporting them again. There are 10,000 words worth of other reasons, but for me this is a point of principle that will not change, certainly not while Keir 'People's Vote' Starmer is in charge.

More reasons to not vote Labour soon!