Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Labour needs to be as ruthless with failing leaders as
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Labour needs to be as ruthless with failing leaders as the Tories
It’s Thursday morning in Downing Street: The door to number 10 opens and the manager of the press office is striding down the road with a folder under his arm. I’m there as a BBC political producer and I know him well. I catch him up and with a little bit of persuasion I get my hands of the press release he’s taking to the Press gallery in the House of Commons.
0
Comments
I'm unconvinced.
It's easy to talk the talk now. It's a New Year's Resolution, promising to go to the gym every week for the whole year, to give up tequila and junk food.
They didn't oust Brown. They didn't oust Miliband. There's a culture of loyalty/subservience in Labour. I can believe MPs might wish for a bad leader to be axed, but who would wish to put their head above the parapet? Didn't work well for James Purnell.
One for MalcomG who spent most of the last few weeks calling everyone morons when this was ever mentioned.
Troll who hounded Charles Kennedy over his battle with alcoholism is forced to quit SNP
Mr Kennedy was the victim of extensive personal attacks from SNP loyalist
Brian Smith is believed to have posted more than 130 messages on Twitter
Smith forced to quit today as it emerged he was friends with Ian Blackford
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3120302/Charles-Kennedy-trolled-badly-employee-working-time-delete-abuse.html#ixzz3cpXW0WLX
What is the "failed creed of Milibandism"? Neither more nor less than the reason Labour was created: the belief that politics, at bottom, is about economics, and that's what's good for you is also good for me. Neither of these propositions stands up in the 21st century - perhaps the second one never did. Some advice for Danczuk - do a Carswell. You'd be happier.
To-day we have the politics of identity, like they have in the States, in which there are two or three right-wingers for every left-winger and the rest are not so much in the centre as anti-political.
Something we will not be hearing from the people in favour of railway renationalisation: Network Rail isn't doing too well for passengers or freight operators:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33103854
Something which will probably get worse as the various electrification schemes get started.
Edited extra bit: to add a little to my earlier point, do people believe the Conservatives will be unified and lovely over the EU? If not, why believe Labour will change its spot so dramatically?
Parties are slow to change their character.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/11669052/George-Osbornes-pensions-triple-lock-will-help-drive-Britain-into-deficit.html
"A growing pensions and long-term care bill means the government will need start borrowing to plug the gap between revenues and expenditure from 2023-24, even if the economy grows at a steady pace of around 2.4 per cent a year."
As I said yesterday, with inflation at -0.1%, now would be a great time to freeze the state pension.
What Labour needs is a Shadow Cabinet member, not a potential leadership candidate to resign and encourager les autres.......
Faux outrage at mildly unflattering descriptions of Charles Kennedy. And of course it's the SNPs fault not any individual.
Meanwhile the SNP are on 60% and a significant number will be voting Green on the List and squeezing seats out of the Tories, Labour and any remnants of the Liberals.
1/ for sexist reasons, Labour will be reluctant to replace Yvette
2/ EIC actually looked quite good in mid-term polls
3/ the choice for a potential replacement leader is always from among the losers of the previous donkey derby.
3 is important because if you think back to 2013 or so, when Miliband's ephemeral poll lead was evaporating, pollsters asked how a different Labour leader would affect VI. Changing leader to any of the actual alternatives made, it turned out, no difference. Changing to David M did make a difference, but he wasn't and isn't a candidate, and was arguably appealing noy because he was good but because, like Liz Kendall, he simply hadn't yet been exposed as bad.
Even if 1 doesn't apply 2 and 3 do - so there's not much more prospect of getting rid of Butcher than of Mrs. Balls.
Swinney and Salmond were ditched soon after failure.
Ditto CK and Ming.
The graveyard is the ancestral burial place of the Lochaber Kennedys.
Although it's wryly amusing that he's being buried about a mile or so away from the ancestral home of ... Clan Cameron.
Only over 'Daily Heil nonsense'?
What a bunch of big jesses the SNP are then......
The problem for Labour with Ed was that he didn't look that crap in polls and nobody looked better, so there was no obvious need for a a replacement nor a candidate in the wings. With Broon they knew they were staring defeat in the face and David M would have done better for them, but he bottled it - or, to be charitable, calculated that he would be better off waiting and letting Brown lose so he could become leader and win in 2015. He reckoned without his own brother, which speaks volumes.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/12/scottish-independence
Curiously, he doesn't mention the electoral evisceration of the largest Unionist party in Scotland as a factor.....
If only there were a political website where a group of people could pass independent objective assessment on whether a Labour leader had a chance of cutting it with the voters on being Prime Minister....
All this Faux Outrage and SNP Bad isn't working. The stupidity of the article and by association anyone who claims it is meaningful is plain for anyone to see. By associating yourself with such risible nonsense you undermine anything else you want to say. It looks utterly incredible and reads as nonsense. When you are contaminated - as Scottish Labour and probably the entire Scottish Loyalist Cult are now - by association with nonsense, no-one will listen to anything new you have to say.
The whole current Loyalist tactic is counter-productive and it's put the SNP up to 60%.
I'm enjoying the demise of Labour but capable of congratulating people within the party if I like what they've done.
If you'd ditched Marmite Eck a couple of years ago you would probably have won the referendum.
Why is it ok for Prescott to pontificate but not another former MP? The reason Prescott wants them to be quiet is that they are from the right wing of Labour, which is why it is best for the Conservatives that they keep quiet.
To borrow a phrase, from SindyRef, 'we've heard it all before'....
Oh, and it wasn't just the Mail:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/snp-campaigner-accused-trolling-charles-5868776
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/scotland/article4468007.ece
http://www.whfp.com/2015/06/11/skye-snp-official-under-fire-over-abusive-online-attacks-on-kennedy/
Grow up.
In cults on the other hand, criticism of former leaders amounts to apostasy.....
The supposed "campaign" against Kennedy does not exist and few seem to give credence as to it's existance (Loyalists excepted naturally), the examples of "vile abuse" are not vile nor particularly abusing, being quite normal to most people in society, especially when referencing those who they see as enemies to the best future of their country.
The desperation is getting quite ridiculous and to some degree I can understand why Loyalism is getting so desperate. Nothing they do seems to work, in fact most of what they do latch on to turns out to be counter-productive when analysed by academics (started hearing less of the "lead to another Indyref" tactic).
Feel free to continue your Faux Outrage. The rest of us will continue to laugh at it.
Of course, you can still become even more crap, by ignoring Labour's failings on that point and enthusiastically throwing yourself into the sixth-form politics of envy and class hatred.
Salmond and Sturgeon aren't immune to criticism. They just don't merit it as they have succeeded beyond the expectations anyone could possibly have had.
Salmond delivered the SNP from a fringe party to being the natural government of Scotland, a majority at Holyrood and took Independence from its traditional 25% support (or often much less) to a rock solid 45% which can withstand significant economic swings against it.
Sturgeon has not been in office long enough to be properly judged but has already delivered a frankly staggering Westminster election performance, has better personal approval ratings than even Salmond managed (and he was formerly the most popular politician in the UK by far and has raised SNP support to levels which are frankly astonishing.
Brown culled a slew of leadership candidates, and Labour didn't help themselves when Bananaman bottled it and failed to follow James Purnell [perhaps on the advice of his dastardly brother].
'Typical Daily Heil nonsense.'
Yet another example of the SNP rent-a-mob.
He can concentrate on his campaigning for dead terrorists like Megrahi and James Connolly.
That you think what was said about Kennedy was "quite normal " says quite a lot - about you......
That is a lie, whether it stems from the Lib Dems, Brian Wilson or the imagination of a journalist is irrelevant. It is simply not true.
It is quite normal to call a drunk a drunk in British society. Perhaps there is a good argument that work should be done to change public perception and behaviour. But that is not work which has been done. For people to believe Kennedy was derelict in his duties as an MP is certainly not irrational or unwelcome. He was.
Mr Smith was spoken to and accepts that his comments during the campaign were entirely inappropriate - as a result, he has resigned as convener of the Skye and Lochalsh branch.
– SNP SPOKESMAN"
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2015-06-12/snp-official-resigns-over-abusive-charles-kennedy-tweets/
You give the impression that you believe your cause is so right that anything that is done to further it is morally acceptable.
Meanwhile the SNP have described the comments as "entirely inappropriate"
So it looks like its Dair vs the SNP/Daily Heil.......
@afneil: IFS says full fiscal autonomy for Scotland now would mean 8.6% Scottish budget deficit v 4% across UK 205/16.
One of Ed's problems was a lacklustre front bench. Any political party needs to promote talent and weed out the duds. There is a risk of having a leadership challenge, but generally the benefit of a variety of ideas being discussed and threshed out is marked. If the ideas are well sorted in Shadow cabinet then they are likely to not be a damp squib when they go out to the public. If an idea is not sound then a strong leader should be able to argue the contrary case rather than just suppress alternatives.
Mr. P, well, we'll find out when Scotland embraces its greater autonomy.
The rule of thumb I tend to fall back on is what would you get away with in the pub.
Polls have become (thoroughly?) discredited. Any criticism from right-wingers will be dismissed and Lab have never had the cojones for anyone actually within the party to say "they're C".
Polls have become (thoroughly?) discredited. Any criticism from right-wingers will be dismissed and Lab have never had the cojones for anyone actually within the party to say "they're C".
Maybe you're right and Brown did cull opponents but off the top of my head I can only think of Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam who were both axed by Tony Blair.
I think it is tricky. One of my major criticisms of Ed was that he and the shadow cabinet completely failed to do their homework and develop a policy framework that would have allowed them to assume the government of this country.
It is hard to believe this was because Ed was lazy, he was not. He did this because he recognised that making those hard policy choices on spending, for example, was going to tee off the fantasist wing of Labour who see more government spending as the answer to everything and think that a Banker's bonus tax will pay for it all (to the extent that they even think about how it might be funded).
Ed's position, under Labour's present constitution, was pretty much unassailable and yet he ducked that essential challenge to maintain a façade of unity. If Labour make the leader more vulnerable to challenge it would seem inevitable that the hard work of producing a credible plan for government would become impossible.
The answer, if there is one, is to square the circle. To find a leader who is willing to lead from the front, challenge the outdated verities of the party and, crucially, win the arguments for the new approach both in the party and in the country (note for the Ed replacement, this involves slightly more than making an incomprehensible speech). Blair at his best did this. It can be done. It's just that looking at the current field...
QUOTE
The Chief Whip, Hilary Armstrong, was on the train. She confirmed that The Friends Of Gordon had behaved badly over foundation hospitals [there was a sizeable Labour rebellion perceived to have been orchestrated by Brownites]. Gordon, she said (as if we didn’t know), was paranoid about losing the succession and ruthless about disposing of rivals. ‘He is convinced that Alan [Milburn] is being set up to succeed Tony and once said to me, ”
I’ve sorted David [Blunkett] and I’ll sort Alan.
END-QUOTE
The SNP can do whatever politicking they like, I think they are ridiculously weak and capitulating on issues like this and Neil Hay and should start defending their people and rubbishing the Faux Outrage. But I also understand that is both much harder politically and probably unnecessary.
'If the Conservatives are so ruthless, btw, why was Mrs Thatcher not replaced before the Falklands War? Labour had double-figure leads in 1980 iirc'
Assuming that's a serious point,Thatcher had just won an election the year before.
I probably read/share about 3 or 4 stories a day on novelty animal stuff too.
The DT does good weird news/animal pix too - but the Mail is more entertaining.
There's your SNP "civic Nationalism" in action.
Nasty brutal thugs, cheered on by their useful idiot supporters.
Or are you just making it up.....?
However, a three year break clause will not address the fundamental problems which appears to be one of unswerving loyalty and the ability to admit they selected a duffy.
Some of you will have noticed that around 50% of the voters in Scotland at the GE voted SNP.
Among many other things, this means that everybody knows a considerable number of people voting SNP who can in no way be recognised or vilified as the scum which far too much of the unionist press scorns them as.
Indeed, with people having recognise the totally inability of the unionist media to provide anything remotely near balanced coverage, the attacks on the SNP have become counter productive-hence the 60% support in the polls.
I believe that the Sun even produced a picture of him to be pinned to dartboards.
The difference between the papers and the CyberNATs is that you can make a choice to buy or not a paper, which even print contact details so that you can challenge them - the CyberNATs attack is to destroy with what ever is to hand and to hide in the shadows.
What makes it so insidious, is that they could be a workmate, a neighbour, a friend, a relative or a spouse writing these things and you would never know.
From what is beginning to happen now is that the media are beginning to take an interest in outing them, and if they start throwing resources in to the hunt it could prove rather worrisome to many in the SNP.
You must be joking!!
Ouch.
I, for one, look forward to our new Bose-Einstein Condensate EU.
I heard from someone who worked in a school (over a decade ago, now) that you can pick whatever ethnicity you like on the official forms. So, if you want to be black, you can be. I'm uncertain whether inventing new ethnicities (purple, or spotty, or norkleporgish) is acceptable.
An IFS graph for 2019/20 showing a few % points difference in debt/GDP ratios is not going to mean anything to SLAB's supposed 190,000 supporters currently on holiday with the SNP. Also worth noting that the IFS is a right wing think tank not the Delphi Oracle.
I think SLAB need a "Plan B" and quick, for starters they need to start being much more positive about Scotland and it's prospects. In terms of SLAB leadership, I don't think Kezia is the answer, particularly if she is seen as Murphy's appointee. SLAB need to stop demonising the SNP and the 60% of Scots now supporting them, instead of blaming others SLAB needs to take responsibility for its failure. As for kicking out SLAB members who voted for the SNP, how is that going to help attract folks back to SLAB?
The Prince Over the Water returns to reclaim the crown that was rightfully his
That's a better story than someone who served under the wrong Miliband without speaking out
EDIT I understand she got a minority scholarship to attend university - very naughty.
As it happens, I think they have a point - none of the leadership candidates look much good. All the same, starting off under a new leader with that becoming the received wisdom is not exactly a propitious route to revitalising the party.
More generally, I'm unconvinced about the idea that being trigger-happy in getting rid of poor leaders is automatically a good approach. I don't believe that getting rid of Brown would have helped Labour - the reverse, in fact. There's no point changing leader unless (a) there's a demonstrably better alternative candidate, and (b) you have a change-of-policy strategy to go with the change of leader. Conversely, the costs of changing (in terms of lost time and disunity) are not to be underestimated, and the risk of changing (in terms of actually ending up with someone even worse - as in the Hague/IDS transition) are considerable.
What Labour really needs to do is get its civil war out of the way first, and then try to find a leader with a bit more heft, gravitas and leadership talent than the candidates on offer. But that is not going to happen.
So I think we can probably look forward to the new Labour leader having great difficulty imposing his or her authority on the party, and on the strategic choices Labour needs to make being fudged for another term.
"The issue for the SNP that they deny any such people exist, which is patently untrue. A continued denial of reality is apparently popular in the polls, for now. Ask Syriza how that works out long term... "
They exist as a tiny proportion of SNP members or supporters. Even the Hay revelation was substantially false in that the element that claimed he had attacked opponents as Nazis was in fact a referral by him to a satirical website.
The very fact that the unionist press were able to find so little to use against the now 56 SNP MPs when they were absolutely desperate to do so is a testimony to your wayward judgement.
The distortion of the SNP by the unionist media goes on apace, the most recent example being the deliberate distortion of Tommy Sheppard's (SNP MP) views on FFA to which he has responded that he actually said:
""..if FFA were rushed through without the necessary additional economic powers being devolved it would be disastrous"........spun as an SNP MP saying the policy was a disaster"
I suggest you grasp that the electorate in Scotland have rumbled the unionist media lies. In spite of the overwhelming numerical advantage they started with, their abuse of that power to produce abuse against the SNP far beyond that they could prove against the, often unnamed "cybernats", has lost them the moral high ground irretrievably.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/broadcaster-lesley-riddoch-donates-1320-5868461
"BROADCASTER Lesley Riddoch has donated £1,320 to Lanarkshire Women’s Aid after the Record revealed how she accepted the payment to host a poverty conference.
The journalist made the gesture after admitting she may have made an error of judgment in pocketing the bumper payment."
There is an apparent disconnect that the Faux Outrage wants us to believe whenever they start their latest tirade against twitter or other social media. It is based on an utterly ridiculous belief that the language used on twitter is not the language that people use EVERY DAY in the workplace, in the pub, in the text message or in the private conversation.
But it is. It is the language and views that are common across the UK but are portrayed as the height of evil by a media terrified of their death at the hands of the wider internet and social media in particular. Their weak and pitiful attempts to paint the population as monsters over some laughable or at worst misjudged comment.
But please, feel free to continue with the Faux Outrage. The only people it embarrasses as yourselves.
http://gawker.com/5940947/from-otherkin-to-transethnicity-your-field-guide-to-the-weird-world-of-tumblr-identity-politics
The invented Scottish Deficit is just the best example. If the public don't buy the ludicrous numbers, make them bigger as if that's the problem.