Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is Harriet Harman Labour’s Michael Howard option?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is Harriet Harman Labour’s Michael Howard option?
Ed Miliband has now been leader of the Labour Party for longer than Gordon Brown was. For the majority of that time, Labour has been comfortably ahead in the opinion polls and has made steady progress in local council seats and Westminster by-elections. Even so, doubts continue to be expressed about his leadership. Labour has not shown much ability to set a policy or media narrative since he bec…
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
She makes Maggie Thatcher look moderate and sane.
Labour don't just need to get rid of Moribund, they need to get rid of the whole front bench, including this cow, who's well past her sell by date...
Then Harriet told my Mum that 'my Dad thinks your Dad's wife is a b1tch'.
So my Mum punched her. Knocked her over
But yeah, 33/1 that the deputy leader will come after the leader doesn't sound bad, does it?
Nice theory somewhat undermined by the fact that the Clegg Huhne battle was won by Clegg on a razor thin margin by Lord Rennard helpfully ruling out a bunch of postal votes that he deemed inadmissable.
"The experienced members of Gordon Brown’s cabinet have largely melted into the background with most having retired from the front line, voluntarily or otherwise. "
You must know why that is, right? I mean anyone with even a passing interest in politics will know the obvious reason behind that.
"Alistair Darling might be a possibility "
So you don't know why then. LOL Never mind. You might finally work it out when the Crosby election campaign begins.
The odds for the next labour leader tell the more realistic story of who might succeed little Ed. If Labour lost and little Ed went then the succession wouldn't be that different to the last one with the Blairites and Brownites picking a favourite as usual. Factionalism would undoubtedly play it's part but that's about as far as 'ideology' goes in the labour party these days.
If Cammie lost and he went then that would herald a leadership battle focused like a laser on staying IN or OUT of Europe. Those tory spinners who think that wouldn't cause an almighty fight and hugely damaging split in the tory party are living in a world of make-believe.
"and while the headline leadership satisfaction figures are better than Clegg’s "
Yes, that's certainly something of note worth boasting about. Little Ed and Cammie are more popular than the most toxic high-profile politician in modern UK politics. Hooray for them! ;^ )
, and HH is no plotter. He who weilds the knife seldom wears the crown.
@fitalass FPT: Yes; it was a very enjoyable trip across europe by train, and quite easy to book and plan over tinternet. The man in seat 61 website is the place for armchair railway planners! Www.seat61.com
Italian factory owner moves company to Poland while staff are on holiday
It was an audacious move that has divided public opinion in Italy and brought into focus the country’s low productivity and high labour cost crisis.
Earlier this month, the owner of an electrical components factory in the north of the country waved his employees off on their summer holidays. Then, without informing them, he moved the entire operation, lock, stock and barrel, to Poland.
Fabrizio Pedroni, 49, said he was driven to the drastic course of action because his factory, located near the city of Modena, had not turned a profit for five years and he was being strangled by high salaries, crippling taxes and dismal rates of productivity.
Moving the factory to Eastern Europe was the only way of saving his company, which was founded 50 years ago by his grandfather. .........
“If I had told the unions that I intended to transfer production to Poland, they would have had my property confiscated, just as they tried to block the lorry,” the businessman told Radio 24, an Italian radio station.
“I had to make a choice. Our competitors in Romania and Poland offer much lower prices. I had three options – either close, move the factory, as many other businesses have done, or shoot myself in the head.”
Labour costs were high because firms like his had to pay generous social insurance, health insurance and pensions, he said.
“An employee who is paid €12,000 a year in fact costs the company €30,000. It’s unacceptable. We haven’t made a profit since 2008.”
The saga has become a national cause celebre, sparking a debate about the number of Italian companies that are relocating their business to Eastern Europe and beyond, prominent among them Fiat, which has a plant in Poland.
Italy’s thickets of red tape, high social welfare costs and corruption mean that it fares dismally in terms of economic competitiveness.
In the World Bank’s most recent Ease of Doing Business survey, Italy ranks 73rd out of 185 countries, behind the likes of Tonga, Kazakhstan and Belarus.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/10262743
That said, I've always thought Jack Straw or Alistair Darling were more likely senior safe pairs of hands in this parliament.
France cannot take any more taxes, government admits
France's Socialist government has admitted that the country cannot cope with any further tax rises and promised no more hikes just days ahead of the country's largest ever tax bill.
In an unfortunate piece of timing, however, the pledge came just as the environment minister announced the creation of a new "carbon tax" and amid reports that the overall tax pressure on French households will rise even further next year.
Returning from their summer break, the French are about to discover stinging rises in tax bills in their letter boxes – the result of a series of new levies enacted by President François Hollande as he seeks to plug the French deficit and bring down public debt – now riding at 92 per cent of GDP.
But the extent of the hikes has apparently even shocked the very Socialist ministers who implemented them.
The total tax pressure (taxes and social security contributions) will account for 46.3 per cent of GDP this year – a historic high – compared to 45 per cent in 2012.
Some 16 million households will see an automatic 2 per cent rise in income tax as calculations are no longer mitigated by inflation. Family tax breaks will be cut.
The rich will see the highest rises, following Mr Hollande's decision to raise the rate to 45 per cent for those earning more than 150,000 euros – effectively 49 per cent due to an additional levy. A rise in wealth tax coupled with another one-off levy means more than 8,000 French people will pay a top marginal rate of 100 per cent on income this year.
In a clear damage limitation exercise, a chorus of top Socialists spoke out against any more rises.
Pierre Mosovici, the finance minister, told France Inter radio: “I’m very sensitive to the French getting fed up with taxes We are listening to them.” Laurent Fabius, the foreign minister followed suit, warning Mr Hollande to be “very, very careful” as “there’s a level above which we shouldn’t climb”.
The topic was top of the agenda at the Socialists’ annual “summer university”, Even more categorical was Bruno Le Roux, Socialist leader in the National Assembly, who declared: “There will be no new taxes” for the rest of Mr Hollande’s five-year mandate.
Mr Hollande’s government introduced over 7 billion euros of fresh taxes after coming to power in May 2012 and another 20 billion euros in the 2013 budget.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/10262561
It's not quite as simple as there being one reason for why Brown's cabinet has melted away. Some have retired to the backbenches, some (like his brother) declined to serve when they could have done, some (like Johnson) were given a go but weren't that good at the job.
One of the main reasons though is that opposition requires a different skill-set to government and the sort of people who are at the forefront in office are not necessarily suited to the demands of opposition. It took the Tories at least two parliaments to deal with their similar legacy before a new generation had come through which 'got' how to do opposition.
As for Darling, yes, clearly he's tainted to a large degree by the mess Labour left but despite the fact he was Chancellor, I'm not sure how easy it would be to pin it on him personally when he picked up responsibility for handling Brown's mess, rather than being the cause of the crisis. Unlike the current front bench, he wasn't in denial about the scale of what needed doing. On the minus side, he is desperately dull (but at least does look like a potential PM); on the plus, he is - as I'm sure you're aware of this - doing a very effective job of heading one side of the most significant campaign in the country at the moment. However, I doubt he'd want it even if offered on a plate, not least because I'm sure he wouldn't want to be distracted from what he's doing.
Aunt Harriet has the unfortunate habit of adopting personal policies where her family is concerned that are contrary to those she recommends for/imposes on the electorate.
She would not be allowed to forget these blemishes of hypocrisy at PMQs
Alistair Darling is Cameron's man, not Miliband's. And we will soon see how "effective" Darling has been, when we see the ballot papers being counted.
I think Harman might have been able to lead Labour to victory in 2010 if her "feminism for posh people" attracted Conservative women voters, and her not being Blair or Brown meant Labour voters were less likely to stay at home. She is also, unlike Cameron or Brown, able to think on her feet so she'd likely have done well in the televised debates.
But 33/1 does not appeal as I cannot see the late coup taking place, and if Ed does depart earlier, there will be time to bet once we know all the runners and riders.
Is there something of the night about Harriet ?? .... has she been seen haunting Peckham graveyards. And if so and with her propensity for speeding, has anyone actually seen her Kevlar aura down the cemetery ??
It's all cloaked in mystery and a black (equality) one at that !!
I rather like her no nonsense manner. And like Hattie she's never scared to come out fighting her corner. - importantly she's not driving a wimmins agenda which kills Hattie stone dead for me.
"L0000L...
She makes Maggie Thatcher look moderate and sane. Labour don't just need to get rid of Moribund, they need to get rid of the whole front bench, including this cow, who's well past her sell by date..."
I remember when Rod used to be one of the brightest and best on here.
I'm being serious.
When Brown resigned Harriet became LotO and Labour leader just as Margaret Beckett did in 1994 after John Smith died. Accordingly should Ed fall under the Peckham omnibus either before (most unlikely) or after the 2015 general election (almost certain) then Harriet would succeed again.
Although Labour doesn't use the term are the odds makers thinking "permanent" rather than "interim" leader ?
But anyone other than Ed as Leader in this Parliament is an acknowledgement that power has been lost for a couple of elections. Or they can keep Ed and just be guaranteed a loss of one...
I found the timing of Ed taking on the unions slightly odd. That is the sort of move you pull when you know you have no chance of winning the election but have to grasp a nettle to have a chance in the future.
To an extent EdM is a victim of Labour success in the polls. In 2010 he was clearly the long term choice. It's the fact that 2015 looks winnable, that has caused him problems.
It depends how you define differentiation. Huhne was a bit closer to Kennedy in policy terms but the lib dems had fallen into the same mindset as the tories had and just wanted their version of Tony Blair to be plausable and presentable on camera. Clegg was better at that but Huhne would have been sufficient for them and the closeness of the vote reflected it.
It's the overarching reason and was driven by the endless infighting around Brown and Blair and the forlorn wish not to see a repeat of that. It damped it down for a short time but those who remained clearly can't help themselves and are putting their oar in yet again.
Are some not in govt. suited to opposition? Clearly and after working their way up the greasy pole an amusing amount of Blairites and some Brownites just wanted to 'cash in their chips' as it were and get busy on the more financially lucrative ventures they had planned to do when out of office. I'm 100% sure. It's not as if there hasn't been small clues like linking Balls to Brown at every opportunity.You don't think Crosby would endlessly rerun the 'highlights' of the financial disaster interspersed with the man who was chancellor at the time and oversaw it all? I tend to think he would.
The somewhat transparent tory infatuation with Darling, now that he has moved from attacking Brown to attacking little Ed, would end in a heartbeat if he was actually put back in the shadow cabinet again. We all know it would and we all know precisely what the attacks would be focused on because we already saw them from Cammie and Osbrowne the last time Darling was chancellor.
Howard was never exactly user friendly but he was at least credible. Taking on Hague with an economy going down the spout was not going to be easy but this is really embarrassing.
Funny how Ashcroft was such a big issue then.
The two examples in the intro are cases where similar things have happened before: Howard and Campbell. Campbell was also Lib Dem deputy leader and interim leader during the election (and similarly, not a very good choice, though that didn't stop his party electing him).
Two other points re Harman. One, already mentioned, is that she's quite good on her feet which is a very useful quality as LotO, as their main opportunities come at PMQ and (if they happen) the election debates. Ed, by contrast, is crap at it (though Cameron's not that much better). The other point is to think about the composition of Labour's electoral college. Harman has useful contacts in big unions and - returning to conclave metaphor - young cardinals elect old popes: she'd be unlikely to mess up the careers of MPs too badly.
One further consideration: if Labour do find themselves in so much trouble that they dump Ed, would there not be some pressure to unite around a single candidate, which would save considerable time and expense in not holding a full ballot?
Ref other names mentioned, Straw has a library full of policy positions he's implemented that run contrary to Labour thinking and in any case, really is acting as if he's half way to Ovaltine and slippers. Beckett (!) even more so (and besides, was she ever any good at anything other than super-loyalty to the leader of the day?). Darling would be a possibility as mentioned but (1) he's busy doing something important, unless the vacancy fell the other side of the referendum, which really is very late in the parliament and (2) the odds aren't very attractive. Johnson was given a shot at a high position in opposition and fluffed it. He's proven himself not to be a safe pair of hands.
All the more so since Canavan is more than familiar with how labour operate in Falkirk.
"Don’t mess with the flower arrangers. That’s one piece of advice for anyone thinking of becoming a vicar. Other guidance includes a warning against putting a memorial inscription on anything like a chair, because it “will make it very difficult to get rid of in a few decades time”. The words of wisdom come in a new book of “rules for Revs” written by a Church of England clergyman who started blogging his insights when he returned to parish ministry after years as a bishop’s chaplain.
Mr Fletcher, now vicar of Beverley Minster, writes: “The only people who ring before 9 o’clock in the morning are undertakers. Or bishops.” He notes: “Just because you’re on Twitter it doesn’t make you acceptable to the young.” No church hall booking system ever works properly, he continues, adding that if you want something to thrive, threaten to abolish it.
“Always accept a resignation” is a piece of advice that is perhaps applicable outside the Church, as is: “The preferred communication style of most churches is osmosis and telepathy.” And any regular churchgoer will appreciate this warning: “Beware the vicar who has just returned from the Holy Land.” Mr Fletcher also suggests that a sure way of galvanising the 99 per cent of the parish who never attend church is “to promise to remove a pew”..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/faith/article3851548.ece?CMP=SOC-appshare-iphonetto-tw-ios-1.6
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-leads-calls-bill-2210323
Salmond should man up and take responsibility.
Laughable as it may sound, Anas Sarwar MP will be far more important to the outcome than Alistair Darling MP. Supporters of a 'No' vote should be worried by that fact. Very worried.
She'd be a good choice because;
1. She's a woman
2. She has compassion and is known to fight for the oppressed.
3. She's articulate
4. She's eccentric without being weird or geeky (a popular quality in the UK)
5. She's a leader
6. She has a brilliant USP. Like Blair she CHOSE Labour unlike Cameron and co just joined the party that perpetuated their own class and privilege.
Much better value is in the next Chancellor market.
Osborne is going nowhere before the GE. Balls is 7/2 with Paddy Power. Perhaps there's a 50% chance of a change of government, and if so there must be at least a 60% (probably more) chance of Balls being the Chancellor in that new government. Combine those and 7/2 looks generous.
However, Balls isn't wholly secure as Shadow Chancellor and Miliband may be prompted or forced to act before the GE. If he does, the name most commonly being touted is that of Darling, who polls show would be more popular in the post than Balls. He will (probably) win plaudits for the outcome of the 2014 referendum, will be out of a job, clearly covets the post, and is the name most commonly cited as a replacement for Balls.
Darling at 20/1 with Ladbrokes as next Chancellor seems the best value bet.
I suppose he's doing better than his BT chums, which isn't quite the same thing (or saying very much).
Panelbase August (net ratings):
Q: On the basis of what you’ve personally seen and heard, which of these people do you think are telling the truth about independence?
Alex Salmond -3
Nicola Sturgeon -5
Dennis Canavan -19
Blair Jenkins -31
Alistair Darling -27
Michael Moore -43
Anas Sarwar -47
Blair McDougall -62
We have also been here before, more than once: http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8265681/labours-lady-in-waiting/
P3 is at 10am, and qualifying starts at 1pm. I'm undecided as yet whether to offer a qualifying tip, but we'll see how things stand (if the weather's likely to be very wet then trying to forecast qualifying could be nigh on impossible).
I went to the Edinburgh festival and book festival and I met no one pro or anti who claimed they could predict the result other than to say it would be close and was unpredictable. I did encounter some anger within families particularly from those wishing to keep the status quo with other members wishing to go it alone. Should be interesting to see what happens after the dust settles.....
As I said a few weeks ago whatever the polls say this is by no means a done deal.
So a woman leading Labour would be a challenge for the tories although I think Yvette is a more credible choice.
Interesting article. Even more reason to think she'd be a good choice. Several months leading up to the election with hagiographic articles like that.....
The Lib Dems should be odds-on to elect Farron after the next election, not least because he'd a good deal more secure in his seat than many other Lib Dems. If there's a change before, Cable is the interim safe pair of hands. Another Orange Booker wouldn't get a look-in.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/23/john-bercow-mimics-tory-colleagues
Just the kind of pathetic excuse I'd expect from your party and leader.
I wouldn't know what tim goes on about (cheers, EiT), but just change the jokes. HH is a rich source of satirical material as we've seen in the past and it wouldn't take much to adapt to her weaknesses in a way that only upsets people who won't vote Tory anyway.
Why aren't you criticising your friends in Labour for the precise same things you were criticising the SNP for you pathetic Blairite hypocrite?
You are right by the way, in the event of a tory defeat the leadership is probably May's to lose.
Personally I think Boris needs to stand in 2015 after all, or all these problems will be put forward by his enemies in Westminster (and there are lots more than you'd think) as a reason why it won't work. I'm a London Labour voter but even I wouldn't get out of bed to argue the case that Boris is breaking a sacred promise to do nothing but be Mayor for the whole period. He's not exactly hyperactive at the moment and seems a bit bored now the fun stuff like the Olympics are over.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-480749/Slow-Minister--Harriet-Harman-caught-speeding-second-time.html
Bercow seems to be quite popular today, but this story is more about his profligacy at the electorate's expense - why does he need so much foreign travel as Speaker?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2401197/Speaker-John-Bercows-star-world-tour-taxpayer.html
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/anger-as-harriet-harman-escapes-driving-ban-for-mobile-phone-crash-6735983.html
Did you see this piece on the composition of the Balcombe 'professional' protesters and how they are supported financially and in kind? Looks like some Green closing of eyes at Brighton.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2401253/Benefits-council-house-non-stop-partying-Its-tough-old-life-fracking-protester.html
Don't certain things about the prejudicial way the Mail report stories irritate you enough to stop linking to them? Here's a random passage taken from your link. Spot the deliberate deception.............
"The Speaker and an aide ran up a bill of £1,062 for a two-night stay at the Park Hyatt in February last year. The hotel – where some rooms cost £1,000 a night – boasts ‘spa-inspired limestone bathrooms’, a sky-lit indoor swimming pool with whirlpools and a spa offering ‘facial treatments and a private aromatherapy steam shower’."
I've no liking for Bercow but when I read stuff like this I just want to shove the £6 an hour journalist's head down the £1000 a night toilet until he drowns.
A Speaker is expected to travel in the recesses to represent Parliament abroad, where there's a lot of interest in how we do things - I've done plenty of seminars for foreign delegations about it myself. It's mildly good advertising for Britain and The Way We Do Things in Politics, which is as we know the world's best and impossible to improve upon.
Edit.. Harriet Harman is nuts..
You should know, better than me, as one skilled in the art of advertising and promotion, that the first objective is to grab the reader's/viewer's attention and then deliver the message. So with all newspaper articles - the message is usually behind the fluff - you just have to unpack it. Why does the Speaker of the HoC need to take world tours and stay in luxury hotels?
Or why bother.
PS - He does pay up so that accusation is not justified.
I am all for people enjoying their own money.
But who are the real clowns here, the taxpayer. Obviously there are clever clowns and not so clever clowns.
On Topic: La Harman may have chosen her party in apparent disregard of her breeding (as Roger points out), but I think that the blatant manoevring of her husband into the Shadow Government, coupled with the fact that she doesn't even try and represent working class men, will rule her out.
Stories about politicians spending lots of money on freebies will always resonate with the readers. It may be naïve, but somehow we always hope that they are in it for the public good and not just to line their own pockets.
That's why there was such an outcry over the charity CEOs "earning" £160,000 plus pa. We hope for saints but we always get varieties of sinners.
I've no doubt that Daily Mail journalists are not the truth-seeking heroes they like to make out either. The trick for journos and for politicians is not to flaunt their ill-gotten gains, but unfortunately, hypocrisy is in both their natures.
"MG .. It is the only way to travel.. Five star and never turn right on a long haul.."
You're absolutely right. Even loaders travel business on a half decent shoot. I don't know what 'financier' is financing but he needs to seriously up his budget.
I once took my own operator to Istanbul and I was put in the Marriott and he was put into a flea pit nearby. The following morning I explained to the production company that this was completely unacceptable and we both had to stay in the same hotel.
The following night they checked me in to the flea pit!
Now the BBC dont accom anybody.Except the Dir.