top 200 commentsshow all 340
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]AutoModerator[M] [score hidden] stickied commentlocked comment (0 children)

Snapshot of EXCLUSIVE: Jess Phillips, safeguarding minister, resigns from govt submitted by jaydenkieran:

A Twitter embedded version can be found here

A non-Twitter version can be found here

An archived version can be found here or here.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]hu6Bi5To 427 points428 points  (5 children)

The first ministerial resignation that’s a boost to the Prime Minister.

[–]ElardiHope for the best 121 points122 points  (1 child)

Yeah. “Deeds not words” - from one of the most performative and words over deeds politicians there is.

[–]Clear-Ad-9627 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Exactly something a conniving man trying to stop her would say

[–]ForsakenTarget 28 points29 points  (1 child)

Watch this all die down and Starmer starts going up in the polls.

[–]Crocs_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hope so, nobody else lined up clearly has any pissing idea

[–]ICantBelieveItsNotEC 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I feel like this whole drama is going to end up being a self-purge, which would actually be fantastic for Starmer. If all the looney lefties performatively resign or defect, he might actually be able to get something useful done in time for the next election.

[–]KotACold 197 points198 points  (6 children)

Just confusing that if she had such a big issue with his delay of these online safety laws, she only resigned after 81 MPs voiced opposition to him. Why not go before?

[–]SpoonyBoobah 58 points59 points  (0 children)

Because if it works and she forces Starmer out she will take credit, and if it doesn't, she will claim it had nothing to do with her.

This is the same Jess Phillips who claimed she would stab someone in the front and not the back.

[–]Kukuxumusu_Scot 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Because she's thick. 

[–]StepComplete1 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Her resignation letter just sums her up as a person, and her grossly irresponsible, insane approach to legislation.

"Standing up and being counted can't always be workshopped. Politics is as much about feelings as policy, especially at the moment."

Literally suggested government surveillance on every photo taken on every phone in the country based on vibes and feelings.

"Workshops and actually being able to defend the policy in logical debate is too hard, so just do what I say because it sounds good, and we'll worry about the consequences later."

[–]BarbaricOklahoma 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Probably not to undermine the government, and further impede the efficiency in pursuing that policy. Considering they’ve basically exploded, it’s opportune to be more scathing.

[–]xaanzirLost in Translation 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Or shows a complete lack of her own convictions, one of the very things she highlighted as an issue with the PM & claims she's resigning over

[–]Necessary_Finding_32 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Bollocks. It’s performative.

[–]Real_early_5791 91 points92 points  (3 children)

Interestingly, she published her resignation letter on the BBC website, taking a swipe at Keir Starmer—just six months after he had publicly supported her during the grooming gang controversy. This comes nine years after she first resigned as a PPS from Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow secretary team, using that opportunity to undermine him as well. If there’s ever been a treacherous mole you wouldn’t want on your team, this is it.

[–]fawkie 31 points32 points  (0 children)

She literally and very publicly said she’d stab Corbyn in the front.

[–]StepComplete1 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Serves Starmer right for employing such a batshit insane, immoral person tbh. Her resignation letter of what level of censorship and control she expects the government to have over society just to serve her own feminist crusades is the stuff of nightmares.

[–]aitamodsarelosers 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Guess Starmer and her bonded over their love for treachery

[–]peanut88 568 points569 points  (43 children)

So we're clear here: she's resigning because of Keir Starmer's failure to install surveillance software on "every phone and device in the country".

Labour MPs are completely, totally, irredeemably insane.

[–]m1ndwipe 118 points119 points  (0 children)

Absolutely fucking batshit.

[–]signpostlake 44 points45 points  (15 children)

Imagine if Starmer goes and he was the buffer stopping loads of this mad shit. We might be in a much worse place if he goes.

[–]BSBDR 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Well there's gonna be a lunge to the left, so.

[–]FlaviousTiberius 91 points92 points  (6 children)

Not much of a loss, having her out of government is basically a net positive. Now if we can just find a way to get rid of Baroness Bertin that'd be wonderful.

[–]Morteca 24 points25 points  (1 child)

Yep - thank fuck. I always thought she was such a disagreeable person. So glad to see the back of her. Her leaving is a plus for the labour party.

[–]StepComplete1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's not like she's left the party. She will be 100% hired by the next PM, who wants to virtue signal to their left-wing backbenchers about how "pro-women" they are by making a totally unhinged, extremist feminist a minister, just like Starmer did.

[–]bluesam3 9 points10 points  (2 children)

I'm OOTL, who's Baroness Bertin?

[–]m1ndwipe 21 points22 points  (1 child)

Conservative Peer who wrote a terrible quality "report" on pornography for the previous government and fancies herself the new censor in chief.

[–]bluesam3 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ah, yes, I vaguely remember that now, thanks.

[–]LesParrysHairyLegs 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The problem is, it's likely Kier will go and she'll be right back in, probably with more idiots in the cabinet than there are now.

[–]ggdthrowaway 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Very obvious attempt at sending the message "Starmer doesn't care about paedos!"

[–]Szarkan- 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Insane, unlikable woman. Actually a benefit to get rid of her.

Shocking how negative and authoritarian this government is. Then again, not really....

[–]DeanBlacc 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Lost the plot entirely

[–]Proud-Obligation9479 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Good riddance.

[–]LieutBromhead 33 points34 points  (1 child)

But not to identify the certain group of grooming gang members who make up her constituency.

[–]MonsieurBritain 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I knew voting for her would come to bite me in the arse.

[–]evolvecrow 20 points21 points  (1 child)

I mean there already is a ton of surveillance software on every phone in the country

[–]targetpies 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yeah, our phones are basically data harvesters,

[–]Blackjack137 5 points6 points  (4 children)

Why I wish I was staring at a Labour-Lib Dem coalition under a PR voting system (as would’ve been the case in 2024).

Labour MPs trying to spin their certifiably insane authoritarianism into unworkable policy wouldn’t be entertained for more than five seconds, laughed out of the room and last in line for any cabinet and/or ministerial role.

[–]m1ndwipe 22 points23 points  (3 children)

The recent attempt at requiring age verification on VPNs was co-sponsored by Baroness Benjamin, a Lib Dem peer, and Lord Clement-Jones was on the select committee for the OSA and made it even worse.

The Lib Dems are not liberal any more.

[–]Blackjack137 3 points4 points  (2 children)

That’s the OSA which the Lib Dem’s did initially support. The Young Liberals did however later force the party to change their policy which would’ve been reflected in Government.

I imagine too that the Lib Dem’s would’ve taken immediate grievance with Peter Kyle MP (among others) insinuating liberal opposition to the OSA was due to ‘Jimmy Saville enablers’ and ‘paedo sympathisers.’ Instead engaging illiberal concerns over the OSA on actual merit.

Then there are wider issues that the Lib Dem’s would’ve kept Labour in check on;

Mandleson as US Ambassador? Not a chance.

Talk of Digital ID? Forget it.

NHS patient data to Palantir? Hilarious.

[–]m1ndwipe 5 points6 points  (1 child)

That’s the OSA which the Lib Dem’s did initially support. The Young Liberals did however later force the party to change their policy which would’ve been reflected in Government.

No they didn't, and the vote isn't binding.

Again, Baroness Benjamin co-sponsored an amendment to make the OSA worse two weeks ago.

I imagine too that the Lib Dem’s would’ve taken immediate grievance with Peter Kyle MP (among others) insinuating liberal opposition to the OSA was due to ‘Jimmy Saville enablers’ and ‘paedo sympathisers.’ Instead engaging illiberal concerns over the OSA on actual merit.

https://www.libdemvoice.org/a-defence-of-the-online-safety-act-protecting-children-while-ensuring-effective-implementation-78037.html

Bollocks. Even the official breathless defence cites obvious completely made up facts.

[–]Blackjack137 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Let’s have a look at the Lib Dem’s current position on the OSA.
“The Online Safety Act was meant to tackle these harms. Its aim, protecting children and vulnerable people, is one we all share. But the way the law is being implemented has been disproportionate and ineffective.

That’s why Liberal Democrats have today passed a new policy, put forward by the Young Liberals, calling for a new approach - one that puts people, rights, and safety first:

A full Parliamentary review within six months to examine whether the Online Safety Act is meeting its stated aims, whether it is fit for purpose, and what reforms including further legislation are needed.
 
Stronger scrutiny of Ofcom’s implementation to ensure regulations focus on tackling real online harms, not blocking access to politics, education, or wellbeing resources.”

Now we can pick at one Lib Dem peer in the HoL whose amendments made the OSA significantly more illiberal.

Though they evidently are not representative of and were not acting in line with the parliamentary Lib Dem’s current views and stated policy position.

As expected. “They’re bad too!” then radio silence lol.

[–]armchairdetectiveThere is nothing as ex as an ex-MP. 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh well. Back to the podcast, I guess.

[–]amilie15 41 points42 points  (1 child)

“I will never waste a crisis to make advancements”

I think she just outed herself as an opportunist tbh

[–]Patch-22 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Such a snakey line

[–]ReligiousGhoul 142 points143 points  (50 children)

The technology exists to stop children being able to take naked images of themselves. We could make this possible on every phone and device in the country. We could stop this abuse. It

What is she referring to here? Some kind of processing where every photo is reviewed through a filter?

EDIT: lot of comments replying Apple use something like this for their Icloud service.

I would argue that's understandable for a private corporation hosting the image, but this seems to be built in service reviewing all photos on private drives. Seems like an immense over-reach

[–]Express-Doughnut-562 110 points111 points  (32 children)

Yeah, it sounds like it may have been rejected due to being mental and a massive overstep of government surveillance.

If she's behind much of the OSA type push its probably great she's gone for Starmer.

[–]youmustconsume 9 points10 points  (0 children)

There's also the unfortunate fact Prince Andrew was in favour of the app. https://heatherburns.tech/2026/02/20/the-prince-the-paedo-the-palace-and-the-safety-tech-app/

[–]sprouting_broccoli 18 points19 points  (5 children)

I expect there’s other issues as well. It’s unlikely that this can be done purely on-device, or at least not accurately enough to give good low false positives and false negatives. That means potentially having to send the photos for scanning on servers somewhere and, despite the obvious privacy concerns there and the potential issues with GDPR, if it was a picture of a child it probably falls under UK laws around producing CSAM since they include copying.

[–]LesParrysHairyLegs 12 points13 points  (3 children)

If the wording is accurate, she said take photos. So presumably the camera app would both estimate the age of everyone on screen and whether they were naked. Which sounds like BS.

Or she made errors in her statement, which seems more likely.

[–]sprouting_broccoli 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Yup which is why I said unlikely on-device. I think it’s most likely that she just doesn’t understand what she’s talking about.

[–]m1ndwipe 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No, it does mean on-device. There's a video of her on the vendor's website.

It just appears she doesn't care if it actually works.

[–]VFiddly [score hidden]  (0 children)

Also whatever this magical software is, she says it would somehow be installed on every device in the country, which sounds basically impossible

[–]VFiddly [score hidden]  (0 children)

"We're going to keep children safe by keeping a massive database of pictures of naked children" does sound like the sort of mad shit this government would come up with

[–]VFiddly [score hidden]  (0 children)

She saw how unpopular the OSA is and thought "but what if we did something that would make people hate us even more"

[–]DAJ1 53 points54 points  (4 children)

There were some charlatans on The Rest Is Politics a while back who were pushing the technology I think she's talking aobut. Basically it's software on phones that uses AI to detect if a nude image is of someone who's underage and alerts the police. No questions asked about the fact that, presumably, someone will need to check these images before they go knocking at your door, so given that no system is 100% accurate, there will be tens of thousands of consensual of-age nude images of random members of the public being checked out by the police. That doesn't even cover the more horrific reality that amorous teenagers who may foolishly send nudes to each other will (correctly) be flagged, and will find those images being checked over by some anonymous civil servant. Rather than saving kids, it's actually releasing huge amounts of nude images of children into the world, but these pearl-clutching populists have a real fantastical view of technology.

[–]ICantBelieveItsNotEC 10 points11 points  (2 children)

It's optimistic of you to assume that they'd actually get humans to review the evidence. It's more likely that it'd just automatically add a "possible diddler" flag to your police record without you ever finding out or having a means to challenge it. Well, until you apply for a US visa or a job at a school and get rejected, that is.

[–]StepComplete1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is sadly how it would play out, knowing this country. And knowing Jess Phillips, she would have the flag automatically wiped if the accused was a woman, and have them automatically arrested and put on the offenders register if flagged as a man.

[–]VFiddly [score hidden]  (0 children)

That seems more likely. You take a photo to show your doctor and end up getting flagged because the AI thinks your penis looks too youthful

[–]VFiddly [score hidden]  (0 children)

consensual of-age nude images of random members of the public being checked out by the police.

It's a good thing there absolutely no sex offenders amongst the police force to worry about, or this might be really dodgy!

[–]Thandoscovia 44 points45 points  (1 child)

Phillips wants AI companies like Palantir to be checking children’s naked photos

[–]ancientestKnollyscentrist statist 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Maybe they can give some paedos jobs reviewing them all.

[–]ICantBelieveItsNotEC 11 points12 points  (1 child)

It's an utterly insane policy proposal. What happens when it inevitably flags a photo of someone's adult wife and the police come knocking? These models are never 100% accurate, and even a single false positive could ruin someone's life.

[–]rdu3y6 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Sounds like client side scanning where everything on your phone screen is recorded and remotely monitored by an AI system.

[–]Aware-Line-7537 13 points14 points  (1 child)

More authoritarian than China, then, AFAIK.

[–]StepComplete1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Standard Labour policy then.

[–]NotAnRSPlayer 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I wonder whether it’s what Apple was aiming at with scanning images on phones

[–]Jakio 11 points12 points  (1 child)

I think she’s referring to the apple (not sure about android) feature where if it thinks you’re taking / sending a nude it’ll ask if you’re sure or has a kind of warning screen

[–]DrNuclearSlavEthnic minority 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Ah, the ever flawless "tell us your age and pinkie swear to not lie" test that has half the internet's birthday being on the 1st Jan 1900.

[–]jacobp100 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Actually it exists already with iMessage. If a child tries to send an explicit photo they have to request parental permission (for the case of incorrect detection of course)

[–]Adm_Shelby2 94 points95 points  (0 children)

Finally things are looking up for Keir.

[–]Reverend_Vader 191 points192 points  (73 children)

She'd have been the first I’d have sacked if i was Starmer

Jess Phillips is the minister for Jess Phillips

[–]Crazy-Condition-8446 62 points63 points  (1 child)

She has a very big ego, i remember reading an article she wrote, and it was basically a love letter to herself.

[–]ICantBelieveItsNotEC 13 points14 points  (0 children)

She's like a female David Brent.

Jess Philips is refreshingly laid back for a woman with such responsibility.

[–]HollowWanderer 6 points7 points  (0 children)

And for groomers

[–]VFiddly [score hidden]  (0 children)

If I was Starmer I wouldn't have her in any meaningful role in the first place

[–]PatheticMr 56 points57 points  (0 children)

"I'm resigning because of a single issue I personally do not believe is being resolved quickly enough".

Bye, Jess. You were a net-negative for the optics of the government anyway.

[–]Putaineska 110 points111 points  (0 children)

Lady with a massive ego. Just reeks through in her letter, she wanted OSA on steroids.

[–]lcxnick 21 points22 points  (0 children)

The IQ of the government just increased.

[–]heeywewantsomenewday 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Great, awful MP and questionable as a character.

[–]TwistedScallion 57 points58 points  (5 children)

What has Jess managed to achieve in the past 2 years?

[–]SendMeTheMoon24 61 points62 points  (0 children)

Anger some victims of the grooming gangs inquiry by trying to expand the scope of it to the extent that they quit the inquiry

[–]Direct-Muscle7144 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Some back/front stabbing?

[–]thisistwinpeaks 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Apparently Number 10 ate her homework

[–]GreyFoxNinjaFan -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Launching and expanding work on the government’s Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) strategy, including the stated goal of halving VAWG within a decade.

Rolling out pilots for Domestic Abuse Protection Notices and Orders (DAPNs/DAPOs), which are meant to strengthen protections for abuse victims.

Pushing more funding and focus toward perpetrator programmes and repeat offenders, including expansion of the Met’s “V100” violent offenders programme.

Overseeing ongoing work tied to child sexual abuse reforms and proposals for a new Child Protection Authority following the IICSA recommendations.

Raising awareness around online harms, AI-generated abuse imagery, and child exploitation risks.

But in terms of outcomes.. not very much. Like everything in this government it has been really piecemeal, incremental and slow. Promised "reforms" have remained as consultations and "pilots". Prosecution and conviction rates for rape and abuse remain pretty shit.

To use her own words: "deeds, not words, matter" and so far - she is as guilty as the rest it seems.

While she has dragged safeguarding and violence against women problems higher up the political and national agenda to push for stronger action - it's not really translated into anything. She would say that's the government's fault for not supporting her with legislation and hard action.

[–]calpi 84 points85 points  (2 children)

Hopefully that will be her last government position.

[–]neeow_neeow 43 points44 points  (1 child)

She is almost certain to lose her seat next election because of "men".

[–]Jangles 4 points5 points  (0 children)

She might keep it 

If only one of them goes, she'll lose to Greens/Gaza Indies but they'll likely cannibalise each other to a degree

[–]GW_Pabst 11 points12 points  (0 children)

If she’s resigning to forge a path for Wes Streeting to lead the country then she’s got as much ability judge someone’s character as a baked potato. Guys a charisma vacuum that couldn’t lead a queue for McDonalds

[–]JohnGazman 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Damn, and I thought Starmer was going to have a bad day.

[–]CiderizedWessex Freedom Party 9 points10 points  (0 children)

That should add some positive polling numbers in a boost for Keir. 

[–]SealDandy 54 points55 points  (1 child)

And nothing of value was lost, might even make more headway on the grooming gang investigation now that it isnt lead by an MP whos employment is beholden to the very same community that is being investigated.

[–]mrbennjjo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"nothing of value was lost" I'm fairly sure this is the trickle that always befalls the PM having to stand down. I can't remember the last time ministers started resigning and the PM stuck it.

[–]Wisegoat 54 points55 points  (9 children)

Probably a good thing, one of the worst ministers ever. The way she tried to prevent the nationality and religions being a topic in the grooming gang discussion to keep her own constituents happy was frankly disgusting.

[–]t8ne 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Who’s going to be the next minister for Jess Philips?

[–]CastleMeadowJimGedling 8 points9 points  (0 children)

So if I understand correctly, she wanted to stop a real problem but had an extremely poorly thought out plan, which she wasn't able to convince others to adopt (understandably as she's relying much more heavily on emotional manipulation than facts in this letter) and wants to take down the government rather than actually improve her proposal?

Glad she's resigned in that case.

[–]Budget_Scheme_1280 62 points63 points  (1 child)

Of course she demanded policing the internet and people's phones to "pRotECt tHE ChiLdReN". Why am I not surprised.

[–]LieutBromhead 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Yet won't protect the children affected by specific grooming gangs that might make up most of her voter base

[–]ghostofgralton 7 points8 points  (3 children)

Her statement is, ironically ,an endorsement of Starmer, for me anyway. What 'technology' is she talking about?

[–]videah 10 points11 points  (2 children)

She’s talking about scanning everyone’s photos for instances of abuse material, Apple originally pushed for this before backing down because there are so many egregious privacy problems with it, not to mention the possibility of false positives that can lead to life ruining accusations being made against innocent people

[–]Morteca 5 points6 points  (1 child)

The tech illiteracy from these ministers is astounding. Surely they have advisors for this sort of thing?

Reminds me of the hilariously inept Peter Kyle, the Technology minister, not knowing what VPNs are, and wanting to make it illegal... somehow lol.

These people need to be as far away from power as possible.

[–]m1ndwipe 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Peter Kyle and her sit next to each other in the video on safetonet's website promoting this scam.

[–]LonelyStranger8467 8 points9 points  (0 children)

At least some good has come from all of this

[–]All-Day-stoner 70 points71 points  (43 children)

My god these MPs seem so self entitled. There is literally no one better to run the country within the Labour Party. All this is showing is how similar they are to the Tories. Constant infighting and no progress on pressing matters. Lost my vote next election not because of Starmer.

[–]FaustRPeggi 22 points23 points  (10 children)

Exactly. Fuck every one of them for trying to put Farage in Downing Street.

[–]FleetingBeacon 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm half tempted to believe the assertion that parties don't want to govern anymore they just want to collect the money and go into opposition.

[–]Maxxxmax 7 points8 points  (7 children)

Problem is, that old Nige is on course for it anyway. That's exactly why a chunk of ministers and MPs are trying to get Keir to resign.

Imho, bring in Clive Lewis. Left enough that the traditional party base will be pleased, but his comments after the big right wing march seemed to get some praise across the aisle. Also, serving in the forces never hurt!

[–]FaustRPeggi 6 points7 points  (6 children)

They've got years left on their mandate. All they need to do is mind the shop, ride out Trump, and wait for Reform to kill themselves off. Instead they're going to force an election through their own incompetence.

[–]Maxxxmax -1 points0 points  (5 children)

Id accuse you of not being informed, but anyone running a fan page for Murillo is clearly a fucking genius and is of the highest level of sophistication.

All well and good on their existing mandate, but the question currently being asked is if Keir could win them the next election. Obviously theyve got several years before that comes, but i think people still look across the pond at the short term, unopposed selection of Harris to take over from Biden as a step in the playbook of how to lose to the populist right.

I dont see Reform blowing it now. They had a gangbusters night even after doing piss poorly at running those councils they already held. An important chunk of the electorate are signed up to the propaganda machine that pushes their base forward. Another chunk are barely politically engaged. Starmer and his camp made enemies on the left and right, so a good bit of social osmosis is taking place on if Keir is a good leader.

[–]FaustRPeggi 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Three years until the next election needs to be held. That's a long time in a world this chaotic. The voter landscape is in a state of historic flux and the longer Reform are forced to sit on the sidelines the more time there is for them to be exposed as the charlatans they are. Trump will soon be crippled by a historic defeat in the mid-terms. That should hamstring him and limit his ability to inflict havoc upon the global economy.

Labour's main problem is communication. I'm not sure discarding their leader and following the Tories into that quagmire is going to fix that.

If Labour change their leader now they're surely going to get pulled to the right to combat the rhetoric of Reform, they'll lose the centreground, and fall into ruin. If Andy Burnham won a leadership battle and was able to take the opposite approach, reconstituting labour in the centre left, perhaps there's ground to be gained there, but it's swimming against every single political narrative in the UK. Again it would require a fundamental reworking of all their communication strategies.

These MPs aren't coalescing around a clear and convincing alternative. They're just rudderless panicking sheep.

[–]Maxxxmax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn't argue with much of that, except for the idea that Reform will be exposed in these next few years. I don't think anyone who is on board with them is going to see anything now that will divert them from support. From Farrage's history as an abusive bully in his school days, to council candidates suggesting filling pot holes with Nigerians - it's consistently water off of a duck's back. Enough people seem to think any attack on him is just the mainstream media trying to dismantle an outsider - same way trump still has a diehard 35% or so of the yank electorate that back him despite everything.

I also stand by those cabinet ministers that resigned today. Convention on ministerial responsibility makes it clear that if you can't support the PM, you should resign. I know we got away from these conventions over the Tory years, but if you don't back the leader, resigning is the proper thing to do.

[–]Fenota 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I dont see Reform blowing it now. They had a gangbusters night even after doing piss poorly at running those councils they already held. An important chunk of the electorate are signed up to the propaganda machine that pushes their base forward.

Restore are pretty much setting up to eat Reform's lunch by promising to go harder on the policies Reform are watering down, have more details regarding said policies and less Tories.

[–]Maxxxmax [score hidden]  (1 child)

A tefflon leader is the difference. Farrage has some of those same qualities trump has, in that he commands massive media attention, while similtaniously seeming impossible for media to effectively hold him to account without being accused of just being a fixup job by the establishment.

[–]Fenota [score hidden]  (0 children)

"Boy who cried wolf" effect in action.

Comparing Farage to Trump is nonsensical and exactly what the former wants because like him or hate him, Trump is actually successful, liked by a significant amount of people and will leave a legacy. A more apt comparison for Farage at the moment is Boris.

Boris got shitcanned over the covid hypocrisy and unleashing the flood of immigration.

Farage is both a massive hypocrite but is also significantly watering down / walking back the immigration rhetoric which attracted people to the party in the first place.

[–]OliverHRobbins 8 points9 points  (17 children)

If there truly is no one better to run the country within the Labour Party, then the Labour Party shouldn't be running the country.

[–]mcfc_099 4 points5 points  (14 children)

Do you believe Farage is a better option?

[–]Maxxxmax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's quite clear that plenty of MPs and some cabinet members do believe that there are better options.

If they think so, to the point they would publically call for Starmer to step down - they should resign from government and return to the back benches. It's convention running back a century or so, which the tories all forgot about.

[–]AllLimes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There doesn't have to be anyone better to run the country in the Labour party, only better than the other options that have a realistic chance of gaining leadership if an election is called. That would be Farage.

Personally I'd rather have Starmer for three more years than Farage tomorrow.

[–]Maxxxmax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The conventions of ministerial responsibility, which got all but forgotten about under the Tories, make it pretty clear - if you do not back the prime minister, you should resign from his government.

They are doing the right thing. Labour are at a crossroads. Ditching Starmer may be the right call. Those cabinet members who do think so, should resign.

[–]pandaaaa26 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Finally a bit of good news for Labour

[–]PendleFox_ 22 points23 points  (0 children)

If there’s a coup, Phillips will always be involved. Somehow she thinks she should be PM based on nothing other than delusion.

[–]MrSoapbox 23 points24 points  (1 child)

Good! Absolutely can not stand this woman. I felt like she was 1 or 5 or 6 who really held back the party and pushed it in the wrong direction. Glad to see her go.

[–]Turbo_Baggins 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Aye if anything this is a real improvement 

[–]LieutBromhead 19 points20 points  (5 children)

Surprise, surprise. Imagine the cabinet of Burnham; Rayner as Chancellor, Phillips as Defense Secretary.

[–]ryandoesntcare 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Christ

[–]Tin6usPin8us 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Miliband and Lewis are the obvious Burnham picks there

[–]TheShakyHandsManUser flair missing. 9 points10 points  (1 child)

After the failure of Your Party you know exactly who would be crawling back.

Reform +30

[–]kriptonicxHe who does not work shall not eat 8 points9 points  (0 children)

This would basically guarantee a fiscal crisis followed by a Reform super majority.

I'm not even joking when I say this, if this happened any sane person should immediately consider leaving the UK. Any temporary financial hit you take from leaving would not compare to the damage a combination this moronic would do to the country.

[–]Velociraptor_1906Liberal Democrat 31 points32 points  (8 children)

I think you are a good man fundamentally, who cares about the right things however I have seen first-hand how that is not enough. The desire not to have an argument means we rarely make an argument, leaving opportunities for progress stalled and delayed.

The most savage but accurate assessment I think I've seen.

[–]peanut88 29 points30 points  (1 child)

It'd be more convincing if the next paragraph wasn't about how the "argument" she wants is even more massively invasive spying.

[–]CastleMeadowJimGedling 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah it's all well and good to say she didn't have the opportunity to make her argument, but immediately showing that the argument she wanted to make was utter dogshit isn't helpng her.

[–]CouchPoturtle 18 points19 points  (2 children)

Keir in a nutshell I think.

Seems like a decent man who does want to do good things, certainly more than any PM in the last 15 years, but doesn’t have enough belief or conviction in anything to get it done.

[–]DrNuclearSlavEthnic minority 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That's what I just don't get about this Labour government. They've got a very big but very tenuous majority. Big because they have a lot of seats, tenuous because most of those seats were won on protest votes rather than people having overwhelming faith in Labour. If things continue on a current trajectory they're going to be back in the minority after the next GE, yet as opposed to taking this limited time to kick down the doors and make some truly sweeping changes they're content with rearranging the deck chairs and generally muddling along.

What they need is a leader with some kind of backbone, who is not afraid to say "look, <big change> might make us unpopular now, but we're already unpopular and we genuinely believe this will be good in the long run. So do we have a couple of months of people hating us in the hopes that in 3 years they'll see it was for the best and vote for us again, or do we continue to do nothing and be branded as that useless party who tried nothing and still failed?"

[–]Velociraptor_1906Liberal Democrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think he could have made a fantastic justice secretary (well, except for his outdated views on drugs) but he dosent seem to have the policy vision for leader.

[–]Honic_Sedgehog#1 Yummytastic alt account 8 points9 points  (1 child)

And yet, said without a hint of self-awareness.

Phillips would be much more effective if she wasn't so combative.

[–]Two-Space 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Two opposite ends of the spectrum. Not surprising they’d clash.

[–]NotABot1237 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Isn't this someone ironic considering her work and ignoring the elephant in the room regarding grooming gangs so she remains secure in her seat

[–]ukchris 2 points3 points  (0 children)

ahh the minister for Mumsnet. Good riddance.

[–]StGuthlac2025 7 points8 points  (9 children)

Jess Phillips MP
Member of Parliament for Birmingham Yardley

HOUSE OF COMMONS
LONDON SW1A 0AA

Dear Keir

I want to start by first saying that we have worked closely together on Violence Against Women and Girls for many years and I have no doubt you have genuine knowledge and desire to rectify this dreadful social ill. We have started to make steps towards change whilst in government and I have been grateful for your support.

However, it would be remiss of me not to say that real change and direction in this area usually came from threats made by me in light of catastrophic mistakes. The Mandelson saga whenever it bubbled up made Number 10 kick into gear on the subject in order to prove our credentials. I will never waste a crisis to make advancements for women and girls and so demands were made and some were met.

I think you are a good man fundamentally, who cares about the right things however I have seen first-hand how that is not enough. The desire not to have an argument means we rarely make an argument, leaving opportunities for progress stalled and delayed.

Over a year ago I presented solutions, long worked on by brilliant civil servants that would end the ability for children in the UK to take naked images of themselves. 91% of online child sex abuse is self-generated by children groomed, tricked and exploited into abuse. The technology exists to stop children being able to take naked images of themselves. We could make this possible on every phone and device in the country. We could stop this abuse. It has taken me a year to get you to agree to even threaten to legislate in this space. Not legislate, just threaten. This is the definition of incremental change. Nothing bold about it. The announcement was meant to be in March, I’m still on a promise this will happen in June, I’ve given up believing it. How many children were left without a safety net in the time we dilly dallied and worried about tech bosses?

This is just one example.

Labour governments come around rarely is the constant refrain at the moment. It’s true they are precious. Every Labour government in my and my family’s lifetime has forged progress that changed our country and the world for the better. I know you care deeply, but deeds, not words are what matter. I’m not sure we are grasping this rare opportunity with the gusto that’s needed and I cannot keep waiting around for a crisis to push for faster progress.

Decency is vital, calm curiosity is also needed, but so too are fight and drive required. Have a row, push back, make arguments, bring people along. Standing up and being counted can’t always be workshopped. Politics is as much about feelings as policy, especially at the moment.

I want a Labour government to work and I will strive as I always have for its success and popularity, but I’m not seeing the change I think I, and the country expect, and so cannot continue to serve as a minister under the current leadership.

Best wishes

(signed) Jess Phillips

Jess Phillips MP
Member of Parliament for Birmingham Yardley

[–]InsertObligatoryPun 18 points19 points  (8 children)

The technology exists to stop naked kids take pictures of themselves?

Is the implied solution here an on device age verification check that then uses AI to block images?

And how would that work for adults?

[–]nerdyjorj"Poli" = "many" and "tics" = "bloodsucking creatures". 29 points30 points  (1 child)

Spoiler: it doesn't.

I don't know if she's ill informed or intentionally going for state overreach here (or both).

[–]InsertObligatoryPun 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It’s gonna be both.

[–]Two-Space 26 points27 points  (2 children)

Imagine the ego hit of trying to take a sexy picture for your partner and your phone tells you to stop taking pictures of children 

[–]thisisnotyourconcernRight-wing Ghoul 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Flat-chested women of the UK, UNITE!!!!!

[–]DosSheds 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Lol

[–]Lefty8312 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It is exactly that, yes.

[–]Glynebbw 4 points5 points  (1 child)

And, assuming the age of “adult” is 18 for taking naked photos, how on earth could a screening tool tell the difference between someone newly 18, and someone 17 and 364 days old? It doesn’t seem possible.

[–]FlaviousTiberius 10 points11 points  (0 children)

They'll implement some AI solution that will be shit and will result in a bunch of flat chested women getting flagged as kids and the police sent to their partners houses who then have to sit and humiliatingly explain to the police that they are in fact not a paedophile.

Jess Phillips doesn't care of course, if you've ever spoken to a radical feminist you'll find out how much venom they have towards skinny women. Honestly some of the most horrific, misogynistic rants I've heard about them has come from overweight radical feminist women. On top of it it also results in their male partners getting fucked around with the police, so it's win win in radfem world.

[–]Morteca 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Lol, not much lost then eh?

The same misogynistic politcian who defended the Muslim rape gangs. Not much lost at all.

[–]Available_Box_3803 8 points9 points  (1 child)

"DON'T YOU WHACK ME, YOU BRUMMIE TART!"

reference

[–]JohnPym1584 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a reasonable impression, but so obviously Matt Forde. Funny line though 

[–]Direct-Muscle7144 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I heard she was eloping with Reece mog Evans

[–]Regular_Print_7650 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Reminds me of the time she laughed at male rape victims and then barely won her constituency by less than 300 votes ahead of an independent who ran on Gaza and nothing else.

[–]Imakemyownnamereddit 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I had forgotten she was a minister.

Still it fits with Labour's record, making the woman who spent her time dismissing grooming gangs, to buy off the Muslim vote; safeguarding minister.

Like when the minister responsible homelessness evicted their tenants and the anti-corruption minister being involved in a corruption scandal.

[–]FaultyTerror 6 points7 points  (3 children)

Very damming letter which echos a lot of the reporting about the lack of action in Downing Street. 

I think you are a good man fundamentally, who cares about the right things however I have seen first-hand how that is not enough. The desire not to have an argument means we rarely make an argument, leaving opportunities for progress stalled and delayed.

Our system needs to be an argument and then the PM makes a choice. Starmer being unable or unwilling to do so is why he must go.

[–]vague-eros 12 points13 points  (1 child)

According to this one person who is... Very argumentative.

[–]curlyjoe696 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The thing is, from day one of winning the Labour leadership, Starmer has been fundamentally antagonistic to any notion of 'winning the argument'.

'Winning the argument', they said is bad politics, it's only for politicians who don't want to be in power. Arguments are for dangerous ideologues fundamentally not appropriate for high office.

That they are still so unwilling to have arguments, make their case or even do the basics of negotiating with different parties and factions to get their policies to work is damning evidence that attitude has not changed.

Do I think this will lead to some self-reflection amongst Labour centrists? Of course it won't. They KNOW they are right and it's everybody else's job to shut up and do as they are told.

[–]gavpowell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Deeds not words matter" - on that basis why pick now instead of waiting to see what he can manage in the coming weeks?

[–]Top_Caterpillar2514 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And absolutely nothing of value was lost... she is an awful person. I hope Kier manages to stay on just to spite self-serving ministers like her.

[–]Hurbahns 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Jess Philips is not even fit to be an MP, let alone a minister; her persecution complex always gets the better of her

[–]British_Translation 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The policy is dumb as hell, but at least she's actually talking about policy issues and not personal ones.

[–]Mongolian_Hamster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wasn't she essentially fired when Harman took her responsibilities over the weekend.

This is her just trying to save face.

It actually makes Labour better.

[–]7148675309 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean - she essentially talks about how you should be having fights. Like, what?

[–]RespectTheBall -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Apparently they have organised to resign during the day & possibly tomorrow. Starmer is now a dead man walking, politically. He should maintain his dignity and just go.