'The BRASS NECK of this exit!' - Bev Turner RAGES at Keir Starmer's 'SHAMELESS' final speech as PM

Before the unfolding speculation about Cabinet appointments, it was Sir Keir Starmer's turn to step down and hand over the keys to his successor. The deposed Prime Minister remained defiant, some might say shameless, as he exited Downing Street for the last time. Surrounded by his advisers and ministers who were supposed to be loyal to his government. Not that loyal, they kicked him out. Here's what he said. My work is done. In six and a half years, I transformed our party from a historic defeat in 2019 into a force capable of securing a landslide victory in the general election of 2024. So what was his legacy? He was frequently praised in Europe while being an adversary of the Trump White House. He taxed farmers and kept Britain out of the American conflict with Iran. He supported digital ID, but then had to backtrack on that due to his poor handling of the issue, of course. Good. He pioneered the Hillsborough law, calling for honesty from public officials. No bad thing. But after two turbulent years in British politics, what is Keir Starmer's legacy? When people look back on his premiership, Candace Holdsworth, let me come to you on this. What will people remember about Sir Keir Starmer? I think for a lot of people, they will remember the free speech crisis. And I think many people at the beginning of Starmer's premiership felt that could be an issue, that one could already see a problem with free speech. And I believe that was confirmed. And I think that, because one of his legacies is the social media ban, that strengthens it even further. Yeah. Kai? I think that's a bit unfair. Look, I find it very difficult to defend Keir Starmer lately. I think, at heart, he was the wrong person for this moment, wasn't he? I think he failed to comprehend the magnitude of the challenges that Britain faces in the 21st century. I mean, they are truly enormous in every aspect. But there have been victories under this government, I'm sorry. You know, the biggest advancement in workers' rights in decades, putting an end to prolonged public sector strikes, as you'll recall was one of the first actions he took upon taking office. There have been weeks and weeks, if not months and months, of that. The Planning and Infrastructure Act, or fast-tracking construction, you know, things like that. I think it'll be somewhat like Rishi Sunak's premiership, where, in two years' time, Andy Burnham will actually be able to highlight successes that were already built in by Keir Starmer himself. You know, they kept their promise of two million additional NHS appointments. They slashed the cost of childcare, which only really started to have an impact last year, at the end of last year. And I think that would lift a huge burden from many parents. And let's not forget, yes, the defense investment plan was widely criticized, not least by the new chancellor. But it remains the largest sustained investment in national security since the Cold War. But none of this was enough. None of this was enough. And I agree with you, Bev, that he'll still be remembered by some for those mistakes, won't he? Those U-turns, those policies that were out of place and failed to be properly ordered. Honestly, when I look at this crowd, I just have to explain to my American colleagues here. This is a man who lost the trust of the nation after two years in office. And lost the trust of all these people who are now hugging him as if he were their best mate. The two-faced, deceitful, selfish bunch of complete frauds. I can't say the word I want to say. And unfortunately, there is a song, I can't sing it, but it basically goes along the tune of... You know what I mean, Simon? No. Keir Starmer is a placeholder. And it was extremely catchy. And unfortunately, when I've discussed this with people today about what his legacy will be, They suddenly burst into song. They burst into song: Keir Starmer is a fill-in-the-blank. Yeah, I get it. Because it's the sheer audacity of this exit. I can't believe what I'm seeing. Why am I seeing a man who's such a loser being treated like a winner? What's wrong with us? Look, you know what? I feel empathy for that, and I believe many people across the country will agree with you. But let me just remind all of you, for the Labour Party, and I don't think it should be party before country, But something truly significant happened two years ago. Keir Starmer showed that he had been able to detoxify a party who, let's not forget, and I remember when Keir Starmer took over, I said, There will be at least two general elections. before he can manage to get the party into a state capable of winning elections. Because we had to cast off that horrible shroud of time when Jeremy Corbyn organized a militant Momentum takeover of the party, filled it with anti-Semites and a bunch of crazies, And nobody ever thought the Labour Party would win. They were counted out by people. And so to that crowd, even though he has made all those mistakes during his brief time in office do not count against him, on at least one side of the ledger There is the fact that he brought the Labour Party into power. and he managed to get rid of the terrible people we see now filling the ranks of the Green Party, for example. And that can only be seen as a good thing. Well, he had 14 years to do it. The Labour Party had plenty of time to get their house in order, didn't they? People are contacting me at home to remind me, because it's on the tip of their tongues of the things he hasn't done well. Breakfast clubs have been a complete failure, says Joe. Breakfast clubs with approximately 24 exclamation marks, in other words, taking children, other people's children, and paying the taxpayer, feeding other people's children That has been received very poorly by people back home. Greg says bringing industries such as the water industry back into public ownership is... Say that again, Kai. Sorry, I was saying that parents would probably disagree with you about the breakfast clubs. Well, yes. The parents who don't want to feed their own children would disagree with me about the breakfast clubs. It raises the question, if you're going to have children, You should at least be able to give them breakfast in the morning. I actually think there would be many parents Who is paying massive taxes at the end of every month? who will also say, I can give my child a Weetabix, I don't need the state to do it. I think the way that this government have wormed their way into family life and that relationship between parents and children I think it is one of the most chilling aspects of what their legacy will be. Go on, Candice. I completely agree. I feel like they view the state as a bulwark against the family. that they are there to correct the mistakes of parents. The state has almost become another kind of parent. As you say, are they feeding the kids, what, toast and Weetabix in the morning? What parent isn't capable of doing that? And if they are not capable of it, they should not have children. That is the most fundamental, essential requirement of parenting. that you can serve your children breakfast in the morning. You should be investigated if you are unable to do that. Also, with the social media ban, I do not want the state usurping my role as a parent. It is up to me what my children do, not the government. Candice, get real. I am real. Have you talked to the teachers? Kids are showing up. Yes, I have three children. Do you have children? Yes, I agree. I know exactly what I'm talking about. I agree with you. I know that you know what you're talking about. But what I'm saying, right, That there's a generation of kids going to school these days who are not potty-trained, who cannot use their hands. I disagree with that. That's scaremongering. No, no, no. It is. Just because you're a good parent, It doesn't mean that many others are. That is fear-mongering. All this stuff about this generation of kids who are potty-trained, who don't know their own names. People say they're swiping books as if they were screens. It's nonsense. It's a moral panic. It is not nonsense. That is not true. I have never met children like these. And I have three. I would say this about that topic. If there are parents who are not preparing their children for school, and we simply don't really know what the actual figures are for that, We hear it all the time, and we know that for sure. due to the events starting from 2020 onwards, There were a whole bunch of kids who basically couldn't go to the toilet. by the time they go to school. They can't hold a knife and fork. They can't even read ABC. We know that that's bad. The precedent we are now establishing, though Under Andy Burnham, that worries me, that will never be a parent's job again. And we have to wait to see, actually, because the state has intervened. We have to wait to see. I have some faith, Simon. I've said it this evening, and I don't want to sound like a broken record, but the fact that what we've seen there is a family man heading to Number 10. He has Marie France by his side, his wife, for at least a couple of decades with three teenagers whom they have raised. I think his eldest is actually in his mid-20s now, Who has been through university? They have been at the coalface of what it is to have a family life and interact with the state. And I think, my suspicion is, that he would probably agree to some extent with what Candice and I have just said there because I haven't found a parent yet who thinks it is the government's job to raise their children. I'm 100% behind Candice on this one. In my book, The Ten Woke Commandments You Must Not Obey The ninth commandment is, Honor the state as mother and father. And here in the United States, We have California wanting to give three meals a day for all children regardless of whether their parents can afford it. Of course, we don't want children to come to school hungry. If their parents are too poor, if they're going through some crisis, Give them breakfast. But why should the state feed my children? breakfast, lunch, and dinner? That's my job as a father and my wife's role as a mother. And that is a slow socialist encroachment. where they want to take you Both fascist states and socialist states do this. They want to take the children. so that their loyalty is primarily to the state and not to the family. I don't think it's a coincidence, Eric. That's what we've heard messaging-wise. from President Trump over the July 4th weekend and also from Nigel Farage, Actually, when he spoke out recently, especially in his anger after stepping down over his parliamentary inquiry. It was before the death of Ann Widdicombe, actually. We've heard both of them talk about the rise of communism. Very clear messaging. We are looking at a world in which the state wishes to effectively raise your children. Is that fear-mongering, Eric? I think it is. but I think it's coming more from the president. It's alarmist. It's not something we see in this country. But again, it's regarded as a dirty word. very much like socialism is. And, of course, you do have a number of states, One such state is California. Illinois, another, New York, where you have the mayor of the largest city in that state actually pushing oneself to do more, tax the wealthy and things along those lines. But again, what we are seeing here in the United States, though It is enshrined in the Constitution. The framers have granted what are known as states' rights. And thus, states govern themselves. with a little bit of independence And there will always be some ideological tension back and forth between how the state governs itself versus what the federal government and what national leaders want to do. But again, that level of tension is what the framers actually built in. And, of course, that's something that they want to see unfold. And I think that level of tension, that back and forth is something that will always be with us, at least here in the United States. Now, we know what a communist loves is a lack of free speech, let's be honest. And that is going to be a major issue. between our two countries. It's huge here in America. The idea of your First Amendment, your free speech rights are enshrined in your Constitution. That has been, I think, will be Starmer's legacy to resonate what Candace was saying then about the crackdown on free speech, the Digital Safety Act, Whatever it eventually becomes, we will call it that. Online Safety Act Although, let's face it, that was born initially under the Conservatives. It was merely intensified. by this Labour government. Simon, how much of that, How closely do we need to watch Andy Burnham? and his feelings about social media, particularly and what we can and cannot say online? We're hearing, apparently, He's going to ban digital ID. I will believe it, my friend, When I see it. I think he might just be a better salesman. Well, I mean, that's, I guess, a different matter to me, the digital ID It's important, But the social media bans are important. For Americans, We watch this with horror. 30 people in Britain arrested per day, 12,000 a year for average tweets, basically. Our rule is You can say pretty much anything you want. as long as you're not encouraging an immediate, imminent act of violence. And that means people can say stupid, obnoxious and sometimes hurtful things. And, you know, I studied law in Britain. more than 30 years ago, and I remember the Public Order Act, and I had no idea at that time that it would be used against people for saying things on social media. What did Lucy Connolly do? 31 months in prison for one tweet that she had been awake for three hours And then erased? For Americans, That's mind-blowing. Eric, free speech This is going to be, Let's talk about Starmer's legacy, actually. You've sat here in this chair For nearly a year now. You've had to put up with my company on an almost weekly basis, Eric Hamm. You've heard a lot about Keir Starmer. What do you summarize? as his legacy as he waves it off like a triumphant victor going off to join some global NGO No doubt? You know, it's interesting because when you were mentioning, and you were talking about the stagecraft of those that were Hugging him and sending him off and basically How they stabbed him at the back I couldn't help but think about Former President Joe Biden and what his party what he did to him and, of course, the very same send-off that he was given. But nevertheless, I thought about what we saw at least from the brief time that Starmer was there and at least during the Biden administration, You had that relationship. where you had the United States, the UK, the rest of Europe serving as a bulwark against Russia and, of course, providing support to Ukraine And I think It was seen. more of the status quo in terms of what you'd expect from the West standing up to a malicious actor. And I think Starmer was a key pillar of that And so I think at least from many within the United States keeping in mind that there have been seven p.m. over the past 10 years, I think many will look at that relationship as something That was status quo and worked the way Many think that it should have. Candace, It's funny, actually. I don't like the left-right definition I've said it before. I think it's tired. In 2026. It doesn't really no longer fit for purpose that old-fashioned dichotomy But the left seem to do a really good job about kissing you in the front and stabbing you in the back We saw it with Biden. We've seen it. with Starmer. At least the Tories Just booted you out and didn't actually Dress it up. as anything other than a complete and complete rejection once you'd, You know, after a dereliction of your own personal professional Duties, Candace. Yes. And they will have a brutal leadership contest as well whereas with Labour It was all quite collegiate. Keir Starmer stepped aside. No one challenged. Burnham for the leadership. And then everyone Kind of shoved him off. Goodbye. But actually It was extremely ruthless. It was very, extremely ruthless the way they got rid of him considering he was the person who brought Labour returns to power. Yeah. Kai, Are we right? What do you mean by that? That, you know, the left-wingers all kind of love you to your face and stab you in your back At least you know where you stand with those on the right. Yeah Maybe you're right. Maybe we're just All two-faced. I mean, I think We're nothing. Yeah Quite. I think there was genuinely A great deal of heartache. You know, when I talked to Labour MPs and look, Actually, many of the shortcomings of Starmer were baked in You know, last year at this time And it took a long time. to come to the realization because they kept thinking, Oh, Let's give him a chance. He got all of us elected. They owed him. They all owed him. their jobs You know, and he did the unimaginable And so I think a lot of people held out hope for much longer more than was rational Frankly. And I think that's why You saw this unfold in the way that it was I think They were genuinely unwilling in their hearts of hearts to let go but realized that It had finally It's been too much. And that's why Starmer eked out two years I mean, I really think He was lucky. to have won Yeah. Candice, Do you want to come in? I did want to say as well From what I heard, Starmer had become such a figure of hatred and many were worried that he was torpedoing with his great unpopularity, Labour's electoral prospects. So people were selfish Am I going to be able to finish this? to keep my job or is Starmer going to destroy the Labour Party? Yeah. Yeah And that is important. because... Yeah You're right. Yeah. I was just about to say... No I was just about to say, You're right. Go on. Go on. Kai. The reason That's important. because there is a significant part of the Labor movement that keeps reminding each other that power, You know, principles without power is completely meaningless Right? It's a very, Sort of. very Blairite way of thinking, this idea that you need to find the best electoral coalition You can. do the unpalatable things to reach out to to the middle ground and so on. And I think They thought that Keir Starmer Understood. and then as they saw as Candace says, the electoral prospects falling like a stone in those early days and not recovering and in some ways many of them thinking it was Very unfair and quite unprecedented for any modern Prime Minister but nonetheless It remained that way. and it does matter, Doesn't it? Yeah. Because if you're in government without a plan and without much on a runway, You know, Two more years, You know, Who are you? going to do With all of that? There isn't much They can do. in two more years I don't know whether we've got a chance to reflect on social media Ban that. Starmer has taken office. Do we have time? to, yeah, Let's have a quick Look at that. Let's remind ourselves What he did about social media in the UK and free speech. I fundamentally believe that we must harness the power of technology to build a stronger, Fairer Britain. But we must also protect our children And so I want this message to be heard Loud and clear. I am not ready to compromise on safety and happiness of our children And that is why this ban must happen and that is why this ban will happen. That, I think, is going to be, that's going to be his legacy, Isn't it, Candice? That is going to be like tightening the grip, lack of freedom I know they Dress it up. as protecting the children and I think we Do you have to do it? something about what children are Looking online. Every parent has to take responsibility for it because it's terrible out there But do you see Andy Burnham coming in and rowing back on Any of this? How does he Handle it? It doesn't seem To be. The signal seems To be, he wants to bring it in even earlier and he's kept Lisa Nandy as the Secretary of Culture and she has said all kinds of things I mean, She said stuff. like she wants the tech companies to prioritise the BBC Channel 4 ITV, the old mainstream publishers ahead of others on YouTube So, I mean, I don't really see there being a lot of rowing back of that I'm just worried It's very authoritarian I mean, It's all the things I was saying I think these kinds of things must come from parents from families, from communities because I think if the state is always correcting for the worst parents out there then you're going to end up with huge authoritarianism The thing about social media is most people I Know my age, millennials because we were raised with social media We're social media natives we actually don't want ours children to have unfettered use of social media Everyone I know limit screen time No one just leave their kids on phones or on all iPads day Everyone is like, We've got to Get the kids off the screens and I think that's where It should come. from It should come from parents and culturally I think things are moving that way Anyway.