Keir Starmer has one objective, to win the next general election and form the next government, preferably with a large overall majority.  Anything that might endanger achieving that objective will be removed.  Starmer identified, early on in his leadership, that one danger was the opposition of the powerful Zionist lobby in the UK.  He has consequently gone to great lengths to appease that lobby.  Many members of the Labour party who voiced criticisms of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian people were suspended or expelled from the Party under allegations of antisemitism

A placated Zionist lobby was prepared to tolerate the prospect of a Labour administration.  

Starmer removed other possible lines of attack by the Conservatives by adopting a set of fiscal rules on government expenditure and national debt that closely matched those of the Conservatives.  He even chose to abandon a core 2021 commitment to spend £28 billion per annum tackling climate change issues when it seemed to conflict with Labour’s fiscal rules.  

The by-election results on 15^th February when Labour took two seats off the Conservatives were further evidence that Labour’s election strategy was working.  It was almost certain that Labour would form the next government and might even do so without having to go into a coalition with another party.  However achieving an overall majority would have likely required that Labour win back many of those seats that Labour lost to the SNP in 2015.  That prospect is now at risk because of the Hamas insurrection on October 7^th.

Starmer has refused to criticise the slaughter of Palestinians by the Israeli state.  Members of the Parliamentary Labour Party were not allowed to call for an unconditional ceasefire because it was seen as a criticism of the Israeli state.  Many Labour Party branches are not even allowed to discuss the issue because it might upset other, presumably Zionist, members.  Many people are appalled by Labour’s reaction to the Gaza slaughter.  The Labour vote might have held up because the Tory reaction was little better.  But Labour’s behaviour on the SNP Opposition Day in Parliament on Wednesday 21^st February will surely have damaged its chances of winning those seats in Scotland that it may need to win to have an overall majority.

Opposition days in Parliament are days when an opposition party has control over the Parliament’s business.  If the opposition party, like the SNP, chooses on its opposition day to propose a motion then their motion is voted on before any amended motion is voted on.  Typically amendments are taken before a main motion.  That typical procedure is not followed on opposition days when the opposition party motion is taken before amendments.  This sequencing allows for a vote on the unamended motion to go on the record before any amended motion is voted on.  It is assumed that the opposition motion will lose and that a government amended motion will win since the government has a majority in the house.

However, Starmer was worried that some 100 Labour MPs would support the SNP motion and so persuaded the Speaker, Lindsay Hoyle, that he should take a Labour party amendment to the SNP motion first.  If Labour’s amended motion was accepted then the original SNP motion would not be put to the house.  The SNP walked out in disgust.  The Conservatives saw an opportunity to embarrass Labour and also walked out.  The amended Labour motion, which calls for a ceasefire but provides the Israeli state with excuses not to agree to a ceasefire, was passed.  This was all done because Starmer was worried how the Zionist lobby would react if 100 Labours MPs voted for the SNP motion with a call for a ceasefire without any qualifications.  Accusations of an antisemitic Labour Party might re-emerge.

Apart from Starmer’s loss of moral authority in the country because of his preparedness to tolerate the slaughter of some 30,000 civilians in Gaza, most of them women and children, his behaviour on the SNP Opposition Day will likely have outraged Scottish voters.  It cannot have improved his chances of getting SNP voters to switch to Labour.

The result in Rochdale was a further blip in Starmer’s general election strategy.  George Galloway won well on a pro-Gaza anti-Israel platform.  The Labour Party came 4^th  after it suspended its own candidate, Azhar Ali, for suggesting that Israel knew of the October 7^th onslaught but let it happen so that it had an excuse to launch a full-scale attack on Gaza.  We doubt the Rochdale result signifies any mass defection of Muslim voters from Labour.  There are not enough George Galloways to go round.

Governments more often lose elections than opposition parties win them.  So it will be with Starmer.  An electorate, exasperated with 13 years of poor governance by the Tories will abstain or unenthusiastically cast a vote for Labour.  Starmer will form the next administration.  However Starmer has shackled himself with fiscal rules that will cause his administration to fail.  The interesting question is will Starmer ditch these nonsensical fiscal rules and reclaim the role of the state in British politics.  If he does not reclaim the role of the state, he will be a one term Prime Minister.