Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
That means MPs being more visible and active in their constituencies. Some MPs don’t even have constituency offices and if they do they’re never open or accessible to the public. It wasn’t long ago that Labour had an MP who'd not held a surgery in 14 years. And in some parts of the country there have probably been more UFO sightings than there have been of the local MP.
Kendall just said on Newsnight Labour spent too much before the crash....
She's lost then. Too many of her colleagues have been saying the precise opposite for over half a decade. If she wins they'll forever be asked if they've recanted and if not is their leader wrong? Potentially too humiliating for all concerned.
@atulh: Not sure Liz Kendall doing herself many favours here. Lesson to other contenders: have some clear answers to Qs on welfare, taxes, deficit
I think she was pretty clear.
She believes Lab overspent. She supports the benefit cap. She believes in the 50p tax as something temporary and doesn't accept views which are critical of its ability to raise revenue.
We know more about her views that Chuka Umunna's vacuous nonsense....
Seems inevitable. I don't really see how replacing the HRA is treated by various people and organisations as though we are getting rid of the idea of protection of Human Rights - and this wouldn't even be an issue if the ECHR didn't keep seeming like an organisation with an agenda above just following the law - but it has seemed like a lot effort and anguish for what doesn't appear a great deal of gain. The majority already too slim perhaps?
Would this have been one of the items dropped in the event of another coalition agreement I wonder?
This, and £12 billion welfare cuts definitely was! Oops!
IIRC correctly the Top Team in Labour must be one man one woman.
IF Kendal or Cooper win then Watson must really be odds on?
This one man one woman part does give opportunities to back 2 or 3 leader candidates at once if there is a clear favourite for deputy. It will be interesting to see how many go for the deputy position if it does not become a too crowded field it might well be easier to predict than the leadership race.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
I think you are mistaken. She is not ceding territory, she is setting out to annex it.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
I think you are mistaken. She is not ceding territory, she is setting out to annex it.
I doubt that's how Owen Jones will see "we spent too much" and "I agree with the benefits cap".
My local newspaper has a very bitter letter from the defeated Labour candidate in a constituency she thought she would win. In it she warns of the tough times ahead with the Tories in power - beggars in the street, schools and the NHS sold off, benefit claimants forced to eat gruel -( I slightly over-egg the pudding but not by much). She finishes with the words 'la luta continua' - the slogan of the former Italian Communist Party. And her day job - she works for Christian Aid.
My local newspaper has a very bitter letter from the defeated Labour candidate in a constituency she thought she would win. In it she warns of the tough times ahead with the Tories in power - beggars in the street, schools and the NHS sold off, benefit claimants forced to eat gruel -( I slightly over-egg the pudding but not by much). She finishes with the words 'la luta continua' - the slogan of the former Italian Communist Party. And her day job - she works for Christian Aid.
They've said the same thing over and over. Every election we have 24 hours to save the nhs, etc etc.
Some of these charidee staff are very bitter lefties even if the organisation calls itself Christian. One such refused to say she would vote for a candidate unless a promise was made to support her campaign. Said with a hint of threat and hatred.
It is registered supporters, not members. While 50% of Labour Members are in and around the smoke, many of the registered supporters will be union members. Many of these will be in public sector unions, often female and in the health and social care sectors.
How many "supporters" are there in relation to "members"
If your analysis of the ir respective profiles is correct then Kendall's background could be a h=big factor.
I still think I need a much better understanding of the mechanics of the vote before I put down my cash.
That said the average punter probably wont do the detail so laying the media favourite could be a good call.
Seems inevitable. I don't really see how replacing the HRA is treated by various people and organisations as though we are getting rid of the idea of protection of Human Rights - and this wouldn't even be an issue if the ECHR didn't keep seeming like an organisation with an agenda above just following the law - but it has seemed like a lot effort and anguish for what doesn't appear a great deal of gain. The majority already too slim perhaps?
Would this have been one of the items dropped in the event of another coalition agreement I wonder?
This, and £12 billion welfare cuts definitely was! Oops!
A difficult one for Cameron to play really - he's been talking up implementing the entire manifesto, when he knows even in the best of times a party will have some rebels on some issues, and with a slender majority he would encounter that as an issue sooner rather than later as even a few rebels could scupper things.
So what's his line for the first time he is defeated by rebels or forced to back down?
Kendall just said on Newsnight Labour spent too much before the crash....
She's lost then. Too many of her colleagues have been saying the precise opposite for over half a decade. If she wins they'll forever be asked if they've recanted and if not is their leader wrong? Potentially too humiliating for all concerned.
It will be a "nasty party" moment that the Tories went through. It is an article of faith that the Government held no responsibility for the financial situation we found ourselves in. That the whole thing was made up by the right wing press. It was all the cause of the global financial crisis.
@hopisen: Yes, we were spending too much (or taxing too little) before crash, but it didn't cause it. It's the truth, and we heard it at last tonight.
I'm sure I recall Cameron of all people saying something like it in one of the conference speechs in the first years of the coalition, albeit with the spin 'They didn't cause it entirely, but they did make it worse' instead.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
I think you are mistaken. She is not ceding territory, she is setting out to annex it.
I doubt that's how Owen Jones will see "we spent too much" and "I agree with the benefits cap".
Arguably Labour need to detoxify: the sooner Owen Jones flounces off to the SWP the better.
Shouting very loudly does not make you a comedian. Quoting her paid up commitment to the NHS might well do good for her. Although if she wins it might become tedious - as well as sending Labour down the same blind ally.
Director of the Ambulance Services Network, and the Maternity Alliance charity, as a researcher for the King's Fund, as an associate director for health, social care and children’s early years at the Institute for Public Policy Research think tank and was a special adviser to Patricia Hewitt. (wiki) She followed Hewitt into Leicester West.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
Or, in a leadership campaign could see her grow and shine more.
It's a good thing that she is saying some stuff which isn't always want the PLP will want to hear. On issues such Labour's record in office, for example - the Tories have already won that battle. If Labour continues to deny their economic record, then they actively facilitate the Conservative argument that Labour are not to be trusted with the economy. If Labour admit their mistake, then at some point that argument is diffused - particularly since the Tories' will have their own economic record to defend in this term.
Kendall just said on Newsnight Labour spent too much before the crash....
She's lost then. Too many of her colleagues has been saying the precise opposite for over half a decade. If she wins they'll forever be asked if they've recanted and if not is their leader wrong? Potentially too humiliating for all concerned.
Well, PB hopes she's lost...
Labour wouldn't be the first party to do a dramatic U-turn and wouldn't be the last. I don't really see how it's 'humiliating'. It'll be some fairly awkward interviews intially, but so long as Kendall gets her cabinet on memo, within some months it'll die down, especially as other issues related to the government come to the fray. Kendall is from the 2010 intake too, so it's a lot more credible coming from her.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
I think you are mistaken. She is not ceding territory, she is setting out to annex it.
I doubt that's how Owen Jones will see "we spent too much" and "I agree with the benefits cap".
Any sensible party would pay no attention to what half-wits like Owen Jones think.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
I think you are mistaken. She is not ceding territory, she is setting out to annex it.
I doubt that's how Owen Jones will see "we spent too much" and "I agree with the benefits cap".
I am sure that Owen Jones will back another candidate!
One other interesting part of her interview was that she contrasted her Leicester West constituency (which is substantially WWC) with her upbringing in the home counties.
It is not often that a Labour politician speaks of their roots as middle class Home Counties.
Woman at work today opined to me that when people talk about Chuka as 'metropolitan' as a negative they are essentially using it as code for Black.
I hope not - as someone who much dislikes cities in general, I wouldn't want my dislike of the metropolitan classes co-opted by racists!
That says more about their ignorance than anything.
I can only assume that their thinking is that Chuka is black; most blacks live in cities; cities are metropolitan; the term 'metropolitan' is being used in a negative sense; racism is negative; therefore describing a black man negatively as 'metropolitan' must be racist.
"When a King subjugates his Parliament, subverts his Judges and suppresses his own people, he is become a tyrant. England will not suffer tyrants. We are freeborn. When a King turns tyrant he breaks covenant with his people and they have a right and a duty to bring him down."
That means MPs being more visible and active in their constituencies. Some MPs don’t even have constituency offices and if they do they’re never open or accessible to the public. It wasn’t long ago that Labour had an MP who'd not held a surgery in 14 years. And in some parts of the country there have probably been more UFO sightings than there have been of the local MP.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
Or, in a leadership campaign could see her grow and shine more.
It's a good thing that she is saying some stuff which isn't always want the PLP will want to hear. On issues such Labour's record in office, for example - the Tories have already won that battle. If Labour continues to deny their economic record, then they actively facilitate the Conservative argument that Labour are not to be trusted with the economy. If Labour admit their mistake, then at some point that argument is diffused - particularly since the Tories' will have their own economic record to defend in this term.
Oh I think she's right. I just doubt whether enough Labour supporters are ready to trust a leader who takes that view.
I'm inclined to start out with a positive view of Kendall in that at least she didn't really pussyfoot around about whether or not she was standing for the leadership. As I did not really have a mental image of her before, my first impression was therefore that she was a straight talker.
That may or may not be true - she was evasive at times tonight, but fairly direct on plenty of points too - and how that will play with Labour party members initially and as she begins her campaign I do not know, but first impressions are she seems like she has potential.
The Labour MP for Middlesbrough denied being idle after a newspaper investigation found that of 100 phone calls made to his office by reporters posing as constituents, not one was answered by his staff.
That means MPs being more visible and active in their constituencies. Some MPs don’t even have constituency offices and if they do they’re never open or accessible to the public. It wasn’t long ago that Labour had an MP who'd not held a surgery in 14 years. And in some parts of the country there have probably been more UFO sightings than there have been of the local MP.
The Labour MP for Middlesbrough denied being idle after a newspaper investigation found that of 100 phone calls made to his office by reporters posing as constituents, not one was answered by his staff.
That means MPs being more visible and active in their constituencies. Some MPs don’t even have constituency offices and if they do they’re never open or accessible to the public. It wasn’t long ago that Labour had an MP who'd not held a surgery in 14 years. And in some parts of the country there have probably been more UFO sightings than there have been of the local MP.
A Scottish MP, I presume.
If anyone saw the stockton north MP on benefits street, you get that impression. He was just out 'delivering leaflets' when the cameras came, but then admitted, despite being mp for four years he had never visited the street.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
Or, in a leadership campaign could see her grow and shine more.
It's a good thing that she is saying some stuff which isn't always want the PLP will want to hear. On issues such Labour's record in office, for example - the Tories have already won that battle. If Labour continues to deny their economic record, then they actively facilitate the Conservative argument that Labour are not to be trusted with the economy. If Labour admit their mistake, then at some point that argument is diffused - particularly since the Tories' will have their own economic record to defend in this term.
Oh I think she's right. I just doubt whether enough Labour supporters are ready to trust a leader who takes that view.
I see Douglas Carswell is busy on twitter this evening including retweeting OGH.
Only oblique references to he UKIP arguments but highlighting the fact he proposed phasing out Short Money in the book he wrote with Dan Hannan and mentioning the former Chief Whips letter in the Times on the subject. Certainly looks like he is going to fight this one all the way.
There seems to be a lot of negative reaction to Liz Kendall's interview with lefties on Twitter. That's a good sign she's got the right message for the public, but is it going to win her the leadership?
Woman at work today opined to me that when people talk about Chuka as 'metropolitan' as a negative they are essentially using it as code for Black.
I hope not - as someone who much dislikes cities in general, I wouldn't want my dislike of the metropolitan classes co-opted by racists!
That says more about their ignorance than anything.
I can only assume that their thinking is that Chuka is black; most blacks live in cities; cities are metropolitan; the term 'metropolitan' is being used in a negative sense; racism is negative; therefore describing a black man negatively as 'metropolitan' must be racist.
Meet a black man from west africa, settled in London. You will have difficulty finding a less metropolitan kind of person. Corporal punishment, capital punishment, patriarchal dominance. Liberal values dont hold too well in tough areas of the world.
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
Or, in a leadership campaign could see her grow and shine more.
It's a good thing that she is saying some stuff which isn't always want the PLP will want to hear. On issues such Labour's record in office, for example - the Tories have already won that battle. If Labour continues to deny their economic record, then they actively facilitate the Conservative argument that Labour are not to be trusted with the economy. If Labour admit their mistake, then at some point that argument is diffused - particularly since the Tories' will have their own economic record to defend in this term.
Kendall just said on Newsnight Labour spent too much before the crash....
She's lost then. Too many of her colleagues has been saying the precise opposite for over half a decade. If she wins they'll forever be asked if they've recanted and if not is their leader wrong? Potentially too humiliating for all concerned.
Well, PB hopes she's lost...
Labour wouldn't be the first party to do a dramatic U-turn and wouldn't be the last. I don't really see how it's 'humiliating'. It'll be some fairly awkward interviews intially, but so long as Kendall gets her cabinet on memo, within some months it'll die down, especially as other issues related to the government come to the fray. Kendall is from the 2010 intake too, so it's a lot more credible coming from her.
I agree. Labour can now move on from the Brown era in a way that Miliband and Balls never could, even if they wanted to. Neither Ed could have disowned that past because they did indeed own it. They were there in No11 when it was happening. A new leader (and leadership team) may be able to move on; it will be twelve years since the start of the crash by 2020. The bigger questions are whether they will want to and if they do, whether they can make it stick.
The reality is that an appeal to the centre is only possible if you're strong enough to carry it off. There's only really space for one party there and if you lose, there's a good chance those same weaknesses will mean you'll suffer in the former core vote as well. But the centre is also an essential component of virtually any electoral coalition necessary to achieve power.
@Matthew495: @bbclaurak@leicesterliz Won't be voting for her - disappointed that she's jumped on bandwagon in saying Lab was spending too much pre-2008
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
Or, in a leadership campaign could see her grow and shine more.
It's a good thing that she is saying some stuff which isn't always want the PLP will want to hear. On issues such Labour's record in office, for example - the Tories have already won that battle. If Labour continues to deny their economic record, then they actively facilitate the Conservative argument that Labour are not to be trusted with the economy. If Labour admit their mistake, then at some point that argument is diffused - particularly since the Tories' will have their own economic record to defend in this term.
Oh I think she's right. I just doubt whether enough Labour supporters are ready to trust a leader who takes that view.
Also, if the parliamentary party is the same as local council groups, you will probably see a total dominance of union conveners from new members.
O'Flynn says (in the Times) ''he attacked a “Tea Party, ultra-aggressive American influence”. His remarks are unmistakably a broadside against a team of relatively new advisers that include Raheem Kassam, a former staffer at the right-wing American website Breitbart, and Matthew Richardson, a barrister who has spoken at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. A third member of the inner circle, the campaigner Chris Bruni-Lowe, harbours ambitions to work on American election campaigns.''
'right wing tea party' - well that will go down well in Labour's north of England heartlands. (any thought Farage could stand in a 'WWC' Labour seat with those words following him around is plain daft.
The dead give away of the split is where O'Flynn says Farage must adopt “a much more consultative and consensual leadership style”.
Farage has gone the bonkers route - possibly even more so than Brown and a whole lot quicker. Anyone now seriously suggesting Cameron was wrong to say he would go after 10 years?
@Matthew495: @bbclaurak@leicesterliz Won't be voting for her - disappointed that she's jumped on bandwagon in saying Lab was spending too much pre-2008
Yes. Smacks of 'the Tories have just won so let's be the Tories'. Labour won't submit themselves to that level of masochism. I suspect they'll pin their hopes on 'the Tories imploding over Europe' and an SNP/Lab pact next time. They'll go for the continuity candidate (whoever that will be).
Is Jim Murphy standing for Labour Leader? More than one PB commenter seemed to anticipate that in recent months :-)
On Scotland 2015 tonight they were discussing the fact that Jim Murphy will be facing a vote of no-confidence on Saturday at the meeting of the Scottish Labour party executive. He is certain to win the vote but the mere fact that there is a vote must make him less than certain to be in place for Holyrood 2016.
@Matthew495: @bbclaurak@leicesterliz Won't be voting for her - disappointed that she's jumped on bandwagon in saying Lab was spending too much pre-2008
That bandwagon being the British public?
This might be one of those times a political half truth is the way to go - like 'Yes, Labour spent too much' while mentally adding 'in the sense that it is now hurting us politically to have spent as we did, even if we do not believe the evidence says it was economically a poor thing to do'.
@Matthew495: @bbclaurak@leicesterliz Won't be voting for her - disappointed that she's jumped on bandwagon in saying Lab was spending too much pre-2008
Woman at work today opined to me that when people talk about Chuka as 'metropolitan' as a negative they are essentially using it as code for Black.
I hope not - as someone who much dislikes cities in general, I wouldn't want my dislike of the metropolitan classes co-opted by racists!
That says more about their ignorance than anything.
I can only assume that their thinking is that Chuka is black; most blacks live in cities; cities are metropolitan; the term 'metropolitan' is being used in a negative sense; racism is negative; therefore describing a black man negatively as 'metropolitan' must be racist.
Meet a black man from west africa, settled in London. You will have difficulty finding a less metropolitan kind of person. Corporal punishment, capital punishment, patriarchal dominance. Liberal values dont hold too well in tough areas of the world.
Indeed. But I'm not sure anyone's explained that to kle4's work colleagues, whose error is in not understanding what's meant by 'metropolitan' in that context.
Woman at work today opined to me that when people talk about Chuka as 'metropolitan' as a negative they are essentially using it as code for Black.
I hope not - as someone who much dislikes cities in general, I wouldn't want my dislike of the metropolitan classes co-opted by racists!
That says more about their ignorance than anything.
I can only assume that their thinking is that Chuka is black; most blacks live in cities; cities are metropolitan; the term 'metropolitan' is being used in a negative sense; racism is negative; therefore describing a black man negatively as 'metropolitan' must be racist.
Meet a black man from west africa, settled in London. You will have difficulty finding a less metropolitan kind of person. Corporal punishment, capital punishment, patriarchal dominance. Liberal values dont hold too well in tough areas of the world.
Indeed. But I'm not sure anyone's explained that to kle4's work colleagues, whose error is in not understanding what's meant by 'metropolitan' in that context.
That would be my assumption. I just hope it's not a widespread interpretation as it would be an unnecessary distraction to the issue of what kind of leader he would be.
@Matthew495: @bbclaurak@leicesterliz Won't be voting for her - disappointed that she's jumped on bandwagon in saying Lab was spending too much pre-2008
The corollary of her admission is that she should actually support the governments cuts and disown Balls (and by association Cooper). Will she? Could she? The level of increase in spending was an increase of 50% in real terms between 2000 and 2010. A huge unparalleled increase that could not be supported. So its not something that can be sneezed away.
I still think of Yvette as the Ice Pixie from the last leadership election.
She's very poor at showing warmth and IMO that's a requirement for a successful leader.
I think Burnham has that quality as he can emote rather well - that I think he's going to be union puppet is another matter. If he could lose that - he's in with a very solid chance. Being Mr Stafford just doesn't seem to matter to Labourites.
I do not wish to be ungallant but I suppose I am, but Yvette Cooper looks like the left overs after Nicola Sturgeon has eaten her for breakfast. All the best to her otherwise because its her politics I detest.
It's a strange phenomenon how women can be the worst kind of nasty misogynists. Step up Plato.
@Matthew495: @bbclaurak@leicesterliz Won't be voting for her - disappointed that she's jumped on bandwagon in saying Lab was spending too much pre-2008
The corollary of her admission is that she should actually support the governments cuts and disown Balls (and by association Cooper). Will she? Could she? The level of increase in spending was an increase of 50% in real terms between 2000 and 2010. A huge unparalleled increase that could not be supported. So its not something that can be sneezed away.
There would still be an argument to be made about the speed of the deficit reduction. She could also propose cuts elsewhere, or raise taxes.
Aknowledging that Labour overspent = endorsing Tory cuts is a false dichotomy.
Is Jim Murphy standing for Labour Leader? More than one PB commenter seemed to anticipate that in recent months :-)
On Scotland 2015 tonight they were discussing the fact that Jim Murphy will be facing a vote of no-confidence on Saturday at the meeting of the Scottish Labour party executive. He is certain to win the vote but the mere fact that there is a vote must make him less than certain to be in place for Holyrood 2016.
I can't believe he hasn't stood down yet. I mean he's lost FORTY seats up there, that's proportionatly a bigger disaster than the Liberals (1/41 vs 8/57) - he is the man that snatched catastrophe from the jaws of defeat, and he's not resigned yet ?!
Labour don't deserve to exist as a political force if they don't elect Kendall. She's a winner.
She's a breath of fresh air now. A long leadership campaign may take some of the sheen off.
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
Or, in a leadership campaign could see her grow and shine more.
It's a good thing that she is saying some stuff which isn't always want the PLP will want to hear. On issues such Labour's record in office, for example - the Tories have already won that battle. If Labour continues to deny their economic record, then they actively facilitate the Conservative argument that Labour are not to be trusted with the economy. If Labour admit their mistake, then at some point that argument is diffused - particularly since the Tories' will have their own economic record to defend in this term.
Oh I think she's right. I just doubt whether enough Labour supporters are ready to trust a leader who takes that view.
Is Jim Murphy standing for Labour Leader? More than one PB commenter seemed to anticipate that in recent months :-)
On Scotland 2015 tonight they were discussing the fact that Jim Murphy will be facing a vote of no-confidence on Saturday at the meeting of the Scottish Labour party executive. He is certain to win the vote but the mere fact that there is a vote must make him less than certain to be in place for Holyrood 2016.
Jim Murphy won a lot of respect for standing up for the union in the no debate, in the face of some rather poor behaviour from yes advocates.
The problem is, those he won respect from were largely English Tories.
@Matthew495: @bbclaurak@leicesterliz Won't be voting for her - disappointed that she's jumped on bandwagon in saying Lab was spending too much pre-2008
The corollary of her admission is that she should actually support the governments cuts and disown Balls (and by association Cooper). Will she? Could she? The level of increase in spending was an increase of 50% in real terms between 2000 and 2010. A huge unparalleled increase that could not be supported. So its not something that can be sneezed away.
There would still be an argument to be made about the speed of the deficit reduction. She could also propose cuts elsewhere, or raise taxes.
Aknowledging that Labour overspent = endorsing Tory cuts is a false dichotomy.
So the options:
Too far too fast MK II Get her chopper out TAX TAX TAX
No - all far too problematic or already discredited. She'll have to go with 'Gideon was right' if she's going to pull this off. For Labour that will be like swallowing arsenic.
Look at @leicesterliz's Tweet: htts://twitter.com/leicesterliz/status/598380621388488704?s=09
Or this one: htps://twitter.com/leicesterliz/status/598040965685841920
She is no Tory...
Good! I cannot say, a few policies here and there, that Ed M's Labour appealed to me on the whole, but whether that continues or not, the people need the parties to occupy more of a broad spectrum for them to choose from. Though with everyone always after the centre ground I guess that is a risky strategy, as if you place yourself too far one way or the other you lose big, but I'm all for as much choice as possible.
So here's to UKIP, Greens and LDs all going on to better things as well.
Is Jim Murphy standing for Labour Leader? More than one PB commenter seemed to anticipate that in recent months :-)
On Scotland 2015 tonight they were discussing the fact that Jim Murphy will be facing a vote of no-confidence on Saturday at the meeting of the Scottish Labour party executive. He is certain to win the vote but the mere fact that there is a vote must make him less than certain to be in place for Holyrood 2016.
I can't believe he hasn't stood down yet. I mean he's lost FORTY seats up there, that's proportionatly a bigger disaster than the Liberals (1/41 vs 8/57) - he is the man that snatched catastrophe from the jaws of defeat, and he's not resigned yet ?!
Staggering.
I think his defense that he needs more time is pretty valid. Also as Brian Taylor notes at the end of his latest article on the subject there is not exactly a rush of people putting themselves forward as a replacement either. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-32712594
@Plato Take a look at Somerton and Frome to see what happens to the Lib Dems when they were unorganised.
And still second in the seat! I guess Lab are not replacing the LDs as the natural anti-Tory vote in some areas at least in the SW (which is a big risk for them).
Lets hope the Tories don't tear themselves to shreds in the run up to the referendum. People who live in glass houses...
Jacob Rees Mogg describing the government as behaving like tyrants over the European Arrest Warrant. A taste of things to come
The Mogg was quite right on this issue, the Gov't treated the house with the utmost contempt.
Expect more of the same I'm afraid.
I really hope not but will not be suprised if there is some sort of stitch up. The Tories like to talk tough and say they are opposed to ever closer union yet hand powers over to Brussels in the form of the EAW.
Jim Murphy won a lot of respect for standing up for the union in the no debate, in the face of some rather poor behaviour from yes advocates.
The problem is, those he won respect from were largely English Tories.
I'm not sure it is unfair. Notme makes the key point. Murphy was a far more active leader for Scottish Labour, and a genuine big hitter. For the right electorate, he would have been a significant asset. That electorate, however, wasn't Scotland 2015.
I think he might well have made a good first minister in the Scotland of ten years ago, in coalition with the Lib Dems, say. He might even have been a credible post-Miliband leader of UK Labour. But he was the right man in the wrong place at the wrong time this election.
Having said all that, he did undoubtedly inherit a dysfunctional shambles of a party for which he can't be blamed (well, as a senior Scottish Labour member, perhaps a little); what he can be blamed for is the SNP scooping up a greater proportion of the electorate than No managed in September, and - particularly given his relative attractiveness to other pro-unionists - the failure to mobilise pro-Labour tactical voting.
Whilst polling has taken a huge dent, Lord Ashcroft's final one about attitudes re the NHS shows that the NHS isn't the total Golden Voter Goose Labour would like it to be.
O'Flynn says Farage must adopt “a much more consultative and consensual leadership style”.
Not surprising. Over the past 10+ years we have had at least 6 major series of groups of senior UKIP people falling out with Farage over his Leadership style. This is the single biggest reason why they always lose MEPs to defections. Farage never learns.
The uns predictors, iirc, were saying 8-9% would return 10ish MPs for years, but we all thought the vote share had to hold up better for the incumbents and so that wouldn't happen. As it did, outside of a rare few it seems safe to say there must have been little bonus if any for most.
Comments
Not all of her answers will find universal acclaim within the Labour party. She is advocating ceding large tracts of previously bitterly fought political terrain to the Conservatives.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/05/what-labour-must-do-is-estrange-its-awful-voters/
It's fresh.
It will be interesting to see how many go for the deputy position if it does not become a too crowded field it might well be easier to predict than the leadership race.
@hopisen: I'll be as honest with you lot as I would be at home. Liz's first answer was brilliant and right. That's the leader she will be...
I hope not - as someone who much dislikes cities in general, I wouldn't want my dislike of the metropolitan classes co-opted by racists!
It is registered supporters, not members. While 50% of Labour Members are in and around the smoke, many of the registered supporters will be union members. Many of these will be in public sector unions, often female and in the health and social care sectors.
How many "supporters" are there in relation to "members"
If your analysis of the ir respective profiles is correct then Kendall's background could be a h=big factor.
I still think I need a much better understanding of the mechanics of the vote before I put down my cash.
That said the average punter probably wont do the detail so laying the media favourite could be a good call.
So what's his line for the first time he is defeated by rebels or forced to back down?
It is an article of faith.
(wiki)
She followed Hewitt into Leicester West.
It's a good thing that she is saying some stuff which isn't always want the PLP will want to hear. On issues such Labour's record in office, for example - the Tories have already won that battle. If Labour continues to deny their economic record, then they actively facilitate the Conservative argument that Labour are not to be trusted with the economy. If Labour admit their mistake, then at some point that argument is diffused - particularly since the Tories' will have their own economic record to defend in this term. Well, PB hopes she's lost...
Labour wouldn't be the first party to do a dramatic U-turn and wouldn't be the last. I don't really see how it's 'humiliating'. It'll be some fairly awkward interviews intially, but so long as Kendall gets her cabinet on memo, within some months it'll die down, especially as other issues related to the government come to the fray. Kendall is from the 2010 intake too, so it's a lot more credible coming from her.
One other interesting part of her interview was that she contrasted her Leicester West constituency (which is substantially WWC) with her upbringing in the home counties.
It is not often that a Labour politician speaks of their roots as middle class Home Counties.
I can only assume that their thinking is that Chuka is black; most blacks live in cities; cities are metropolitan; the term 'metropolitan' is being used in a negative sense; racism is negative; therefore describing a black man negatively as 'metropolitan' must be racist.
It begins with a letter...
I was listening to this intv on R5 about 4am and he was still a fringe figure - I was so WTF that it is seared in my mind.
On subject of main post, Mike's idea for Labour candidates to take Opp Leader's role at PMQs would be awful for them and Labour.
That may or may not be true - she was evasive at times tonight, but fairly direct on plenty of points too - and how that will play with Labour party members initially and as she begins her campaign I do not know, but first impressions are she seems like she has potential.
If anyone saw the stockton north MP on benefits street, you get that impression. He was just out 'delivering leaflets' when the cameras came, but then admitted, despite being mp for four years he had never visited the street.
The 2010 and 2015 intake will not have been in government. They must be nearly half the parliamentary party, what with all the retirements etc.
Only oblique references to he UKIP arguments but highlighting the fact he proposed phasing out Short Money in the book he wrote with Dan Hannan and mentioning the former Chief Whips letter in the Times on the subject. Certainly looks like he is going to fight this one all the way.
The reality is that an appeal to the centre is only possible if you're strong enough to carry it off. There's only really space for one party there and if you lose, there's a good chance those same weaknesses will mean you'll suffer in the former core vote as well. But the centre is also an essential component of virtually any electoral coalition necessary to achieve power.
It was #38 on Labour's target list.
''he attacked a “Tea Party, ultra-aggressive American influence”. His remarks are unmistakably a broadside against a team of relatively new advisers that include Raheem Kassam, a former staffer at the right-wing American website Breitbart, and Matthew Richardson, a barrister who has spoken at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington.
A third member of the inner circle, the campaigner Chris Bruni-Lowe, harbours ambitions to work on American election campaigns.''
'right wing tea party' - well that will go down well in Labour's north of England heartlands. (any thought Farage could stand in a 'WWC' Labour seat with those words following him around is plain daft.
The dead give away of the split is where O'Flynn says Farage must adopt “a much more consultative and consensual leadership style”.
Farage has gone the bonkers route - possibly even more so than Brown and a whole lot quicker.
Anyone now seriously suggesting Cameron was wrong to say he would go after 10 years?
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/its-been-easy-its-been-to-outdo-the-snp
He is certain to win the vote but the mere fact that there is a vote must make him less than certain to be in place for Holyrood 2016.
This might be one of those times a political half truth is the way to go - like 'Yes, Labour spent too much' while mentally adding 'in the sense that it is now hurting us politically to have spent as we did, even if we do not believe the evidence says it was economically a poor thing to do'. Zing!
Denying that is just delusional if you want to get elected again.
Watching half of UKIP tear at the other half because they were waiting with baited breath for Farage to go just makes it even more hilarious.
The level of increase in spending was an increase of 50% in real terms between 2000 and 2010. A huge unparalleled increase that could not be supported. So its not something that can be sneezed away.
Aknowledging that Labour overspent = endorsing Tory cuts is a false dichotomy.
Jacob Rees Mogg describing the government as behaving like tyrants over the European Arrest Warrant. A taste of things to come
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOyXY0jTkwo
Staggering.
The problem is, those he won respect from were largely English Tories.
Too far too fast MK II
Get her chopper out
TAX TAX TAX
No - all far too problematic or already discredited. She'll have to go with 'Gideon was right' if she's going to pull this off. For Labour that will be like swallowing arsenic.
Or this one: https://twitter.com/leicesterliz/status/598040965685841920
She is no Tory...
LDs down 28.1% http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000932
So here's to UKIP, Greens and LDs all going on to better things as well.
Night all.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-32712594
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereford_and_South_Herefordshire_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
Did incumbency really help them disproportionately as we've been told on here for years?
The most telling constituency of the whole General Election ?
I think he might well have made a good first minister in the Scotland of ten years ago, in coalition with the Lib Dems, say. He might even have been a credible post-Miliband leader of UK Labour. But he was the right man in the wrong place at the wrong time this election.
Having said all that, he did undoubtedly inherit a dysfunctional shambles of a party for which he can't be blamed (well, as a senior Scottish Labour member, perhaps a little); what he can be blamed for is the SNP scooping up a greater proportion of the electorate than No managed in September, and - particularly given his relative attractiveness to other pro-unionists - the failure to mobilise pro-Labour tactical voting.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000031
Not surprising. Over the past 10+ years we have had at least 6 major series of groups of senior UKIP people falling out with Farage over his Leadership style. This is the single biggest reason why they always lose MEPs to defections. Farage never learns.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000834