By Alex Smith / @alexsmith1982
This afternoon, Charles Clarke sent an email to colleagues which expressly fires a new shot at Gordon Brown's leadership.
Clarke wrote:
* "We face an electoral defeat which could well give the Conservatives the next decade and more...unless Labour acts now we are likely to spend the next ten years reflecting on the consequences from the impotence of opposition."
* "All the evidence suggests that Brown’s leadership reduces Labour support, that alternative leaders would improve our ratings, and that an election determined by voters’ answers to the question “Do you want Gordon Brown to be Prime Minister for the next five years?” would further shrink Labour support."
* "The ‘class war’ approach is explicitly designed to rack up ‘core Labour’ votes in core Labour areas and to protect the position of the current leadership...Labour cannot win on this basis. We have to remain a Party with the widest possible appeal, which does not rely for support simply upon one particular group, faction or social class."
* "Most senior Labour leaders have had little faith in Gordon Brown’s leadership for a considerable time but over the last year have remained silent, and even professed support...[but] the implications of the status quo are crystal clear – a smashing defeat for Labour and poorer lives for the people we seek to serve."
* "Yet the General Election is eminently winnable for Labour under a new leader. We still have the overall policies and approach which are best suited to meet the challenges of both the current crises and the future, even though we have not recently been successful in communicating them clearly."
* "In Parliament and elsewhere an overwhelming majority of Labour opinion believes that in this position Labour’s chances would be significantly improved if Gordon Brown were to stand down...Over Christmas there have been signs that this strength of opinion is understood in the Cabinet. The New Year will be the time to ensure that the overwhelming feeling which does exist is turned into the action which brings about the necessary change."
Clarke's position is clear: Brown must go if Labour is to stand so much as a chance of winning in 2010 - and he must go now.
As we know, Charles Clarke has never been a fan of Gordon Brown. But the timing of his latest shot is pertinent: insiders have long spoken of the likelihood of a quick leadership succession very early in 2010. Unfortunately for Charles Clarke, this is now plainly not going to happen.
Evidently, it is very unlikely as things stand that Labour will win the general election. But does he really believe that that will change with a new face at the top? Clarke says himself that many of the right policies and values are already in place. To those who will vote elsewhere this time out, that won't matter anyway. While this country is clearly not aching for a right wing Tory government, the truth is that, for too many, Labour has had its chance. And for too many, the party has blown it. More people than Gordon Brown were complicit in that missed opportunity.
Many will say Charles Clarke is an irrelevance, that his time has been and gone, and that these attacks will do Labour more harm than good. I tend to agree with that last assessment. I've repeatedly made my own feelings towards Gordon Brown's leadership known - but the opportunity for change has surely passed.
If the likely candidates were not willing to stand up for fear of failure, retribution or accusations of disloyalty last June, then they are certainly not going to do so now, four months before an election - and nor should they. That's not just because they are too tentative or timid, although they are. It's because they are all too aware that the time for change in the party is not now: for want of a better analogy, you don't change the manager the night before the European Cup Final.
Yes, a leadership challenge might still invigorate the party and save seats. But it would also bring the very real danger of division when we need unity more than ever. Yes, it might refocus attention on the good that Labour can still do in office and bring new debates and supportive coalitions to the top table. But it would also constitute an acceptance that three of the twelve years of Labour government were a complete failure, which is not wholly true.
Of course, that doesn't negate that much of what Clarke says is of course right: there are the elephants in the room. But Gordon Brown is only one of those clunky weights to voters: Clarke himself and any number of other cabinet ministers are equally disliked by large sections the public.
The truth is that we are all responsible now for communicating why we need a Labour government - not just the leader. That's something Charles Clarke would do well to consider. We need to show that, like him or loathe him, the Prime Minister made repeately sound calls on the economy, that most important of engines - though not the only one - for our general national wellbeing. For better or for worse, we are stuck with the leader, a leader whose strengths may not always be so visible as his weaknesses, but one who nonetheless has surprised us before and can do so again.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
New Labour has destroyed Labour for many of us and ensured that left of centre politics will be in the wilderness for a decade in England and increase pressure for fiscal autonomy for Holyrood and the Scots in response to a regressive Westminster Conservative Government that does not understand the innate Scottish social culture of community support for the poorest and vulnerable that could seen an end to the Union - all thanks to a New Labour Party now so far up its own backside that daylight only enters via its nostrils.
Now just how are we going to fix this mess while the Captain and the officers of SS New Labour are committed to running us on to the rocks at full speed ahead?
Have we becaome the Labour Kamikaze Party?
Charlie, this government under Brown is holding an enquiry into Iraq and I also certainly hope Blair is held to account.
Agree with you, but it was a lack of spine at conference problem. They all wanted to be Caesar, without anybody willing to take up Brutus' role for the good of the party and country.
It's too late now, unless he decides to step down for his health. (I'd prefer he didn't, I'd like the electorate in Scotland to deselect him in person.)
Another problem is the way GB became leader means pretenders who feel no compunction to play by the rules either. If the next leader isn't above reproach for the way they handled themselves whilst GB was leader and the way they then campaign for the job, then the cycle of recrimination and counter briefing against colleagues will continue.
Desperate Cameron, now wants to set up a war cabinet, talk about little boys wanting to play war games.
Thanks to Labour's Permawar agenda that doesn't seem like an awfully bad idea for a tory. And there were none so little as Blair and his best buddy Bush.
The original light bridgade, no doubt they may even dress for the occasion.
Charlie Farley and the pork pie mob. Jeez! Charlie that was grim.
Yes, I imagine Cameron, Osborne, Soames and Fox will be every bit as bad.
people are more interested in policy, cleaning up our dirty politicians, so get on with it..
@ Patrick - I feel for you, I really do. I'm afraid we now know that a central part of TB and GB's philosophy has been to turn their backs on the core vote and, frankly, treat them like 3rd class citizens. They have done enormous damage to the backbone of this country. Don't let the b******** have your vote. I wish best of luck with your job search and your health.
Good on you fella!
sums it up.
I am afraid that not many commentators agree with your analysis. I think we should post something on Ian Dales site to get some tories across to post supportive messages for the Great Leader on here. After all, in the run up to the election, we dont want to lose our best asset
We hear too that Harriet will play a major role in fronting New Labour at the election. Boy, you guys really do know how to do it don't you. A double whammy.
Has Ed arranged this so she will get the blame in the post election blood letting, thereby clearing the path to the ultimate prize...... holder of the Labour Party deficit for the next 5 years. Doesn't he realise that the job will be like that of zoo keeper in some failed political menageries where all the great beasts have died or escaped and all that are left are the old, sick and lame in pet's corner who need fight constantly, demand attention and produce prodigious amounts of toxic political manure. I can just see him with his little flat cap and brush
I had a big row with Charles Clarke because from an early stage I realised how selfish and arrogant this man really is. I promised him I would drink a glass of fin red wine when he loses his seat.
That is the first time in my life a Labour MP has so seriously offended me with such vain disloyalty and self promotion.
I am no fan of Brown. I do think he will lose and want us to use the situation to benefit the party. This does not mean for even one moment I will abandon the Labour Party which is greater than any individual. No chance!
We are needed, all of us, millions of people need us, and we have no time now for petty political conflicts within the party we have to be solid and strong. It is going to be seriously scary and tough and we will take a lot of flak on the chin.
But that is what defines us, being popular with the people is great but does not test us, we have to focus on the needs of the people the mainstream are with us, they always will be in truth, because fairness is the hope of the majority of the people in the UK.
We owe it to these people, we have a duty to seek them out and bring hope to them, to show them we care and that their views are important.
We are the future, not the Tories thay cannot grow or develop no matter what they do. Corruption is still haunting them from 1997.
That is why we cannot afford to make the mistakes they have. We have draw the line now and accept with hope and optimism the possible defeat before us so we can evolve and fight back by a factor of ten and make 1997 look like a peaceful picnic.
We can prepare grow and develop, we have to, because the people are right, something different is needed, something they can place some faith in and know will not betray them.
People want to care, they want feel valued, our failure was to keep to our own beliefs in Parliament and evolve our Party and the Unions. Which is what we should have done. That's ok we will do it next time and bring to the Tories a political force based upon the strength of the communities across this country a potent wave of positive support that will wither them and finally address some of the scars of this country that should have been dealt with before.
But in the meantime we have to go out and campaign for the people who need us, who need hope, encouragement and support. They also need to know that what they are doing whether they are unemployed and seeking work or employed in a crap job that it all does have meaning, their lives are precious and have real meaning and we will ensure they get the dignity and respect they deserve to keep this economy going.
Only we can do this, because we are the Labour Party and as long as we are aound there will always be hope for those who need it.
Happy New Year!
".....and as long as we are around there will always be hope for those who need it".
I could have done with a little of this hope that is there for people who need it.
In 1995 I was knocked off my bike going to work and fractured 4 vertebrae and damaged nerves in my back. I had just been offered a place on a commercial diver training course, which I had to decline due to the damage I received.
I also didn't receive any compensation, as whilst in hospital the conditions of the accident site were changed considerably.
Then between 1999 to 2005 I cared for both parents, with social services/palliative care visiting daily, until 2003 when my father died of cancer and until early 2006 when my mother went into a care home due to Alzheimer's. I got about £40 a week carers allowance for doing so, on top of other disability benefits but this all 'went' through bills and taxis to hospital, especially for my mother.
After my mother went into the care home, at the beginning of 2006 I kind of had a bit of a 'breakdown' with all the stress from the accident and the caring role.
I am now looking to start work again, but as I am on strong medication in the form of patches to control the chronic pain. I cannot return to work in my original field of welding, as I just cannot cope with heavy industry. Also the Buprenorphine patches I'm on are quite strong and I've been told by people in the welding industry there may be a health and safety concern?
I did volunteer for about a year, between 2007/2008 at a project that helped people with serious mental health issues access computers in a safe environment. This is now closed.
I've mentioned all this because early last I went to ask the job centre about a course at the OU I was interested in, the form needed stamping so I wouldn't have to pay any fees, and was told.....
"People sign on here, we don't stamp forms for university."
I told them that if they DID stamp OU forms here, perhaps there wouldn't be as many people signing on. It didn't go down too well.
AND this was the security staff at 'front of house' I didn't even get to see an advisor.
So in June 2009 I spent almost £700.00 for an online course offered by the British Pest Control Association and the Royal Society for Public Health to become a pest controller, as I'm thinking of working in the environmental health field. At least I'm trying.
This means I did not buy a cooker. I probably would struggle paying the bigger bills anyway. But I do have a microwave so It's not all bad.
The thing I'm trying to say is I don't think the Labour party cares about me so I'm not voting for them this time.
I am sorry to hear you have had such a bad time. The days of free higher education are long gone. It's a shame those in power who benefited from a free higher education and who also enjoyed clearly what they thought were lots of "freebies" in Parliament seem to be so unwilling to atone for their behaviour whilst people go through experiences like those you describe.
I am glad you found a route via Pest Control and you are to be congradulated on your reslience and effort in not only allowing the difficulties and pain to not stop you, but also to commit your time free of charge to help other people.
I think you would make a cracking politician one day as you have characteristics which I think would benefit others and you are certainly not hesitant or blinded by self-interest.
I too have a chronic condition and the NHS/Pharmacies are incredibly inefficient. Unlike you though once I get the drugs my life is perfectly normal again.
Did you seek any kind of advice or help when you visted the job center?
It is too late now to discuss leadership whether you like Brown or not. The Parliamentary Campaign begins on Jan 4th all across the country, you don't change leaders during a campaign it is utter madess and typical of Charles Clarke to pick this time to speak out when he knows it won't change.
It can't change now the rules of the Labour Party won't allow it.
So you have a real choice be positive about the whole thing or be negative about it.
The election is coming upon us fast and it will be a defining one for us all whatever the result.
Whatever happens the Labour Party is going to face the greatest challenge to it's current course it is inevitable, the same awaits the Tories.
Spot on. In fact it's worth taking a screen grab of this thread so that we can do exactly as you say. Post election defeat when Labour has lost approximately half its MP's and 100% of its influence it will be interesting to re-visit those who are supporting Gordon today and ask them : "Aren't you really glad we waited all those extra months to dump him?"
Jason and the arrogance..sounds quite apt!.
Predicted politics or just sour plums. Whatever your hang about the labour party, I say this Jason' relax and think more about "collective responsibility".
"More like people are voting Labour in Vauxhall in spite of the pro-hunt Kate Hoey"
Damn you, Chris, you've rumbled us. Kate is our best hope of getting hunting returned to this part of Lambeth. It's the number one issue for voters down here. You should see me and the other members of the Stockwell Hunt, smartly dressed in our hunting reds. Of course it's only drag-hunting these days but you are welcome to join us every Sunday morning. Kick-off is at 9am sharp from Vauxhall bus station (just behind the open, public urinal). For lunch we call in at that well-know hunting lodge - the Royal Vauxhall Tavern.
With your level of political insight, Gordon will rest safely in bed tonight.
Precisely how do we do all these things in opposition? A new leader would lift our ratings to match the Tories...that alone gives us a better chance. Too many people don't like Gordon Brown - we can dress it up as many times as we like but Gordon's policies are deeply hidden behind his dour exterior and we cannot win votes (certainly new votes) on the strength of his anti-personality.
We have to remember that the average man and woman in the street doesn't delve in politics like many of us on here do; they see the briefest glimpses of media guff and the slightest sideways stare at the flashing headlines. The public needs someone to engage them again...Gordon just can't do that.
Let's have this same conversation again in July/August when a new leader has been installed in oppostion and we're all wondering why we didn't sort it out before the GE.
We have to win, don't let blinkered Party loyalty get in the way of that.
We don't in Parliament but that is nothing new since nobody in the PLP is advocating that we do it in power i see no problem here. Is Charles clarke asking we do this, are they? Course not he has his own commercial interests here and those of his dubious pals.
People like to get to know a leader and that takes time we don't have and the selection process will be a wonderful platform for the Tories to attack the resulting Labour disunity.
Since many MP's are leaving Parliament through their own disgrace they will be vindictive or just not give a damn what happens in a selection process.
I GB keeps his policies hidden from the public for good reason!
Howard we need much more than just a new leader, we need a new Cabinet, we need clean MP's we need a long term vision.
That does not grow overnight. Four more years of this and a new leader will no more deviate from Brown than Brown did from Blair.
Brown was given a massive opportunity by this country, it was given to him! What did he do with it? what did his sycophants do with it?
To restore the public trust and the terrible situation we are in (millions no longer voting after the expenses-have you forgotton this?) we have to rely on rebuilding the local roots first. That gives you the platform of strength from a reliable source to support the election of MP's.
You have to rebuild the bridge between the people and the elected.
If that means opposition, so be it.
Agreed we have to focus on the people who need the Party, the whole point of this Party's existence was to protect and defend those who cannot do so themselves through no fault of their own.
To me the issue of who leads the PLP is completly redundent. I don't care to be honest.
Helping people with their problems is far more important and ensuring that when it comes to sorting things out the people know where to turn and who to vote for;
Labour.
I predict (without any fear of contradiction) that if either one of the Miliband brothers, Johnson, Milburn or indeed ANY front-bencher other than Mandleson, Balls (x2) or Harmann were proposed, then the result would be a clear win for "More likely to vote Labour" versus GB.
Honestly, Ralph, I simply don't get it that you don't get it that Brown is the biggest barrier to victory. Especially as you spend so much of your time canvassing. Are you trying to tell us that you hear anything other than hatred for Brown on the doorstep? If so then Barking must be a very different place to even a relatively safe Labour seat like Vauxhall where I live. Every single person who votes for Kate Hoey here will be voting in spite of GB, not in support of him. Even the most left-leaning liberals here in Vauxhall (the kind that baulk at a Cameron government) spit-out Brown's name in the same way the miners spoke of Thatcher. It's the same the whole country over. It's ridiculous to try and deny it.
Letting him carry on is not expediency; it's shear cowardice.
I want GB to lead us to defeat, or rather I see it as a lesser of two evils. Awful is it not? The Labour PLP is no longer protecting the weak and vulnerable and so I am happy to let go of them ;) Besides they love money too much and need a holiday, a very long holiday from it, hopefully the rest of their natural lives.
I have always made it clear why I am supporting Brown, initially I thought he was the man with his economic experience, now I believe that any of those people you mentioned would be, despite how nicely they portray themselves a bloody disaster.
We have all had enough of the Neo Liberal project that emerged from the New Labour Ideal. Mp's are obsessed with decision making that profits them personally and have shown an utter disregard towards the public.
Gordon Brown's comment on trying to project blame upon us as voters as being able to wreck the economy displays this contempt for democracy as well as seriously out of touch mentality regarding the status quo.
The quickest, cleanest way to get rid of him and his cohorts is to let them strangle themselves slowly with their own rope. As we appraoch the election we shall tragically see more undignified behaviour as the noose tightens.
We have to be mindful though and keep a watch out for those who display real strength and dignity, and who are clean as they may well be the future of the Labour Party.
All Labour Party members should focus on promoting our vision of hope for the future and reminding people of the perils of a Cameron led Tory government.
Those who seek to prolong this internal debate about the leadership are simply assisting our political enemies.
Stop this disloyal, self indulgent twaddle and start campaigning for a Labour victory
If you wish to have a debate, most certainly, go out and prepare for ..... the wilderness.
To address your concern, could I perhaps suggest the following task: Over the next couple of days, why don't you try asking this very simple question to everyone you meet:
"If Gordon Brown were to stand down now would you be MORE LIKELY or LESS LIKELY to vote Labour. Don't try and second-guess the outcome with some clever words, don't get the answer you're looking for by only asking your cronies or Party professionals. Just ask this question of everyday folk as you go about your business in the next couple of days - and then come back and tell us the answer.
A horse walks into a bar.
The barman asks 'Why the long face?'
The horse replies, "Five more years..."
Me. I'm a pragmatist. I say dump Brown now. Fight tooth and nail for a hung parliament so that we can stop Cameron and Osborne's destructive agenda.
If that was to work with the pool of Mp's we have we would have done it already. We would have put forward a workable team, but we don't have it available to us ina viable form that can replace the polices of the current leaders, unless of course you would advocate a mere cosmetic change.....
I think the majority answer would be; who would you replace him with?
Nice one, put a smile on my face ;)
Most if not all that GB did that's good would have been done by any Labour leader, most of what is bad would not. Harriet, Alan Johnson, Denham, Benn, Hain are all electable. Lets debate where we want the party to go whilst we still have a chance of winning, not when we have to wait for 5 years for the next election.
If its true then someone's getting desperate.
Had a chance to think about what you said.
When i first arrived in Barking it was to wipe out the BNP from Barking and put as much pressure on MP's to sort their lives out.
I did not come here expecting to stand initially, I put myself forward in Thurrock as I considered taking on Nick Griffin, one thing led to another and both Nick and I ended up back in Barking.
I was asked if I would be interested in standing here so I went through a selection process etc, started capaigning straight away.
So I apologise my job is to see them beaten and hopefully see Labour retain control of the Council. I think the Labour Party does need to evolve, but with the iron clad control held by the leaders of the NEC and Party this is incredibly unlikely and any elections they will likely control too.
That is fine by me. They can have it, all the control they want as they drift away into the political wilderness where they belong.
I can't challenge them I am not even an MP and you have to BE and MP before you can anything with this Party, and that is a tragic shame.
I am still going to ensure at some point that those MP's whodare to stand for relection after doing some terrible things do NOT get an easy time for what they have done to the people of this country (something they can't even understand the hopeless halfwits).
Let's get one thing quite clear I use this site to debate and reason and learn like most others not to promote myself. I would rather promote reform the hard work of the collective members here in Barking and Dagenham and those MP's who are clean....oh and Alex for allowing us all to do this.
Ok you win, i'll think about sticking around. I have to admit I would love to have some fun with the Tories battling for Labour Party reform is just so crazy. I can't believe things have come to this sad pass.
Tories are great fun! I love challenging them. What were they thinking when the PLP went down the Tory route, I mean we spent a decade out-debating them, defeating them and all those strong arguments we won, which are as legitimate today as they were then still hold true.
How can these people disregard the very debates we all won based upon values and intellect?
Why am I having to challenge members of my own party with the very arguments we used to beat the Tories leading up to 1997?
Is that progressive or regessive?
"My concern is that if Labour did win and then failed to deliver, I think we could see the end of the party for a generation at least"
Tell me about it! The source of much of my genuine anguish and dread.
But the strategy we are employing here is working very well and I can't wait to get started again and show them the Labour Party is back and with a vengence lol! We are making ourseleves as available to the people as is phsically possible and I mean it I want that 80% contact rate challenge!
heck we are even having a "who can meet the most people" competition with serious chocalate prizes! (I have a terrible weakness for chocolate and so must campaign every day...).
Oh, and with you on the chocolate lol.
In some respects it may be better if Labour did lose then, from a longer term strategy?
This would then allow them the time to replace GB and most of the cabinet with some people that want to make a difference to not only themselves (hey we all have to look after ourselves) but the rest of the country as well.
The Tories will have a bad term I suspect as they'll need to make cuts and will not be popular. This could lead to a Labour come back in 2015?
There is no clear alternative leader so lets make the most of what we have got and continue to wear down the Tory lead in the polls as Camerons positions on issues are increasingly exposed and suddenly people wake up to the fact they will be hit badly by a Conservative Government.
It seems Mr clarke is not the only one , on the live ist there is a peice from Mr sheerman that Labour should act now , From the independent.
Danny
Normally, when someone gets an excoriating criticism like that they would feel so ashamed and embarrassed that they hide away in some hole. Charles Clarke is foolish to think that anyone has any respect for him or his bitter personal messages.
When you cant beat the argument attack the man? Wrong strategy.
Name one. Just one.
Prescott?
Mandelson?
Hoon?
Blears?
Darling?
Balls?
Hodge?
Laughing stocks, every one.
Obviously if I win then I'll be sticking around, if not I have to choose between Florida, Hong kong and Seoul for work purposes. Short of sorting out this country and the Labour Party out there is very little to keep me here.
I have to say that I find your comment surprising and very disappointing.
I cannot leave this country. Partly for family reasons - I have kids and they are coming up to A levels and O levels I owe it to them to have a stable background at such a vital time in their lives; and there's my elderly mother and my wife's parents to think about. Partly for health - I rely heavily on the NHS, I am uninsurable in any other health system and so the lack of healthcare in any other country will curtail my life.
But mainly I cannot leave because I have a deep love for this country. I have travelled elsewhere through my occupation (mostly the US and EU) and I have not liked what I found. The only places where I have felt comfortable have been the Pacific US: San Francisco, Oregon or Seattle, or Australia.
If there is a Cameron government then I expect that things will be worse than his election manifesto will promise. He is a slippery character and he has plans to tear apart the country that we know now. I will fight hard against their crushing of the welfare state and their privatisation of the NHS. But I simply cannot leave this country: to do so will be akin to tearing my heart out. I wish more of our so-called representatives felt so passionate about their country, and the fact that they do not, is why so few people vote.
Sorry you find it disappointing but I think you'll find sorting out the country and the Labour Party are rather big tasks.
But they are impossible tasks if you don't get elected. If the people do not want me to serve them then I won't it's not personal i am respecting thier decision.
I missed England terribly while I was in South Korea especially when I kept hearing about the job losses and found out how bad some of the MP's had been.
But I am a human being Richard, I have a life too. If I am elected I will commit myself completely. If not I won't.
I will have to leave this country to earn a living, the economy here is in a bad way and I ensured i was "recession proof" years ago, survival first in a global economy.
I do love this country dearly and it really does bother me what is happening, but if the people reject you Richard you have to accept it and get on with your life. Too many people get hooked on politics for it's own sake and it helps no-one. It cannot become an end in itself for me. It has to have meaning.
Elections take place every five years I am not immortal and cannot sit down and wait for the next one to come around. The problems this country has will probably not have changed much but who knows how much I will have changed?
Life goes on....I daresay I will miss blighty very much but that is part and parcel of survival.
(A friend points out that the NHS is not the only system that would support me - he's HIV+ and points out that since he can get insurance under the Dutch system, a type 1 diabetic with a history of skin cancer like me should too. But my point still remains. In most other countries, including the Singaporean system that Cameron is currently examining, I will not get insurance, and not get the same healthcare as everyone else.)
What surprises me is that you've written some articulate and passionate posts, and presumably on the stump you tell people that you are the right person for the job. But how can you be if the only thing that keeps you here is getting elected? Do you say "vote for me or else I will leave the country"? Your comment sounded no different to the announcements of the likes of Phil Collins and Andrew Lloyd Webber that they would move out of the country if Labour won in 1997.
I do hope that you change your mind because should there be a Cameron government your country will certainly need you.
If the Labour Party cannot evolve (it still has not from pre 1997, it has jumped from one idea to another equally flawed idea and cut itself in two) then what can I do?
Just caring and being concerned is all well and good but I am not a career politician and Labourlist is not a recruitment site for prospective politicians. I am here at the moment to address a serious problem that may well destroy the Labour Party. I will do all I can to prevent that occurence. But I am mortal and cannot keep battling on forever. True I can still do a hell of a lot if unelected, it has never prevented me from doing anything before and citizens are freer than MP's.
I said that what is keeping me here is sorting or helping to sort out this country and the Labour Party. Getting elected would be a big help. Try and influence the media or academics or anyone as an unelected person they generally ignore you.
This is a very stuck-up country and it is a flaming trajedy that you have to be "someone" before anyone listens to you. I have already done much to try and protect MP's and others associated with the Labour party without any thought or reward for myself.
I will continue in that vein. But defeat should it come is defeat and you have to be able to understand when a battle is worth fighting and when it is not.
We are not immortals and battles move onto the next generation. Time is not on my side ;)
Politics should not be a beauty contest - it should be about policies. There is clear water between what we stand for and what the principal opposition want to do - this should be enough.
How many of the navel gazers here are out campaigning with full gusto?
LOL. Not me. I left the party after the Iraq invasion. I'm hoping for a huge shake up of Labour after the general election and that something will emerge which I can support again.
Why would people campaign with "full gusto" for a party which has treated its traditional supporters as badly if not worse than its traditional enemies?
Not sure I agree with your asseement, but your optimism will be essential as you run your campaign.
I keep my positive energies for the Campaign, I will be working in at least three wards and will on the ball 24/7. The time scale is still tough but we have to meet as many people as is physically possible to meet a contact level of 80% for this Constituency. We will do it.
The campaign starts in January, the election should be in May.
sorry to butt in , it has been rumored that they will not be a budget , So are they expecting the genral election campain to start febuary/march .
Danny
At the moment the party are at 27% in the polls (roughly) and the torys about 40% , If we cant change a leader in these circumstances then something is wrong , The current leadership want what is best for themselves and not whats best for the country ,They are discredited for lies , spin and broken promises , they are trying to divide the country with class war tatics , They are putting through Mr purnnells welfare reforms , Has the Labour party really lost connection with reallity? or has it been taken over by torys?
Danny
For anyone to take what he says on the Labour Party as enlightened and correct would be delusional. Even if he is correct ( and I cannot see how any replacement for Brown will not be Balls - or a huge internal fight) there is no time left.
Even a soon to be retired MP can see the Labour processes needed to elect a new Leader take months. So unless the deputy Leader - Harriet Harman - is appointed without opposition, it is not doable . Or rather not doable and run a GE capmpaign at the same time.
I admire HH> SHe knows her mind, is determined, brave and a good speaker. She would in theory be an ideal replacement.
She would also be a gift to the Opposition parties.. for obvious reasons.
And finally, Charles Clarke is deluded. Any Party which ditches Brown will have to cope with:
Headlines "13 years of Labour rule was all wrong : Labour ditches Brown"
Balls who is an ambitious schemer and will undoubtedly brief against Harman.
Jeers of "no time for a novice"... a quote from a certain Mr G Brown.
and finally: Labour MPs are surely not stupid enough to ditch one loser for another. Well of course they chose Gordon Brown so this premise may be a bit shaky.
Charles Clarke reminds me of Ted Heath : without the charisma, competence or good humour :-)
Alex, I think you know deep down that Charles is right. This one paragraph sums things up clearly and accurately IMO. With Brown Labour will lose the next election. Period. Without him there is a good chance of a hung parliament; and an outside chance of a small Labour majority. It's still not too late.
Labour is like the England football team a couple of years ago with McClaren bumbling his way along. Do you think that England would be in the World Cup finals if they had ignored the obvious fact that McClaren had to go? England saw the need for new effective leadership. When this happened the difference was almost instantaneous...
I disagree. The situation for Labour is pretty much determined by some long standing problems that the whole government has failed to address. At this time any replacement to Brown will be (correctly) perceived by the public to be another different face but with the same right wing agenda.
The whole Cabinet has been disgraced with one or two exceptions I fail to see how replacing Brown, apart from giving the Tories a horde of ammunition to attack us with, would help.
The Tories will accuse Labour of being divided (leadership contests tend to be divisive to an extent) and would make the Party look even weaker) and would play into Tory hands.
In the same way as when the Right Wing Labour MP's resigned during the Euro-election they only did it to aid the cause of conservatism and not the Labour Party at all in way, shape or form.
Besides unless Mr Clarke wants to change the rules and flatten any existing role of the Party Members, a contest would not be decided quickly and he knows this well. Charles Clarke is an embittered, vindictive and shamlessly selfish old man long due for retirement....
We should be so lucky! You won't get that for a very, very long time!
The people Charles Clarke will be hoping to enlist will be:
MP's who feel they were ignored.
MP's who do not want to pay back expenses and probably never will.
MP's who want to ensure they get a bigger pay-off or increase their chances of getting a lucrative private sector job from a Ministerial position supplied by Charles.
MP's who are just plain scared of losing their seats and who have overstretched themselves financially.
MP's who just hate Brown and like the idea of weilding a political dagger.
MP's who are thick (he might do well here).
MP's who are drunk (a New Years sense of humour from me)
MP's who are deeply right wing and want the party to fight for the Tory votes and disregard the ordinary people completely.
Perhaps Cameron hasn't won the election yet - but you have certainly lost it.
Aside from that ...a happy (Conservative) New Year to you
Will Labour even survive financially in 2010/11?
You are wrong Charles is right. "Sound calls on the economy" you sad puppy.
At this time of the year, Scotland is at the forefront of the New Year celebrations.
It seems the Blairites will be singing "Charlie is My Darling" and Ed Balls and thge Brownites will be rendering "A Gordon For Me"
Either way it doesn't look as if they'll be joining hands for "Auld Lang Sine"
Charles constantly blubbing and throwing his teddy "brown" bear out of his pram yet again...
Many people don't like Brown or Blair but we don't go blubbing to the Guardian, Newspaper or TV, this guy is so selfish it is unbelievable. He has as little regard of the consequences of his actions as those he opposes.
As for me I'll stick to Labourlist where people can put you straight or you can make your case! Much healthier for everyone involved ;)
Cheers Alex!
"the world has rejected capitalism"
lolololololol
Yes every day I see the city of London empty and quiet as capitalism, markets, workers and consumerism has all died a death.
Dear me you live in dream land
Nice one.
Both main partys done that not the media .
Happy new year
Danny
Whilst, I wholly disagree with some choices Harriet has made regarding her children's education, I fully support her banging the drum for women. Somebody needs to keep it on the agenda and she sure does that!
Anyway bedtime for me.
Happy new year to all!
Steph
What else annoys me is that Mrs Harman bangs on about equaltiy but the leadership has double standerds , Mrs Smith left the cbnat , Mrs Blears left the cabnat , but Mr Hain and Mr darling are still there , And we pay for Mr Brown expects voters to pay for sky sports?
Danny
Ricki/Danny - I wasn't aware of the other comments - but if they have been made then fair point.
Steph
Stephanie, it's never over till the ballot boxes are counted and the tally adds up.
Brown has clearly laid out a recovery plan and all frontline services are protected and earmarked for more growth
That would be:
a) a recovery plan that leaves us as the only G20 country still in recession.
b) frontline services that will be cut by 10% to protect health, education and international aid.
c) growth as in a projection for a rate of inflation increase only, so 0% real terms increase as Brown put it.
But is wasnt the only one , Many minsters made remarks that indicted that the torys unfit to govern because they went to eton , the class war is between the policatl class and voters , The westminster bubble is far detached from real life .
Danny
Yes - I agree it was hypocrisy. You cannot help where you went to school.
Labour MP's have choices about where they send their children, however, and Harriet, Tony and Diane have shown that deep down they favour inequality. Of course this is the ultimate hypocrisy.
However, that aside I still maintain that one quip by Gordon, hypercritical or not, does not a class war make! That is of course what we have the right wing press for.
Steph
The thing about the "eton soundbite) Was that because he was from there , He could not have a grasp on real life , But if you look at the New Labour cabnat there are many that went to private schools and it looks like hypocrsy .
Danny ( Or ricki or pedro) :)
The fight goes on in or out of government, we the people demand betterment and justice for all.
I agree with you on the issues you raise regarding voter discontent. What I mean about the one quip about toffs is that, in his e mail, Charles Clarke is trying to insinuate that Gordon is starting a class war with the rich. What I am saying is surely Gordon only made a joke about Eton. Do we really think that this one comment was calculated to such a degree as to set the battlelines for our election strategy.
Can we really say his one comment about Eton is indicative or Gordon starting a class war with the rich? I really can't see it.
Its not one quip about toffs, Its the alienation of the white working class , the marrige with the bankers and the quickie divorce , Its the lies , spin and yes iraq 100 thousend (or more ) dead on spin , Voters have a conisnce.
Danny
Good idea , The baltimore post ( sorry alex) and anytime a post from No 10 spin machine gets posted.
Danny
Charles is sadly deluded if he thinks the issue is Brown. The issue is expenses, recession, debt, apathy and the issue of Iraq still.
Even supporters of Charles will begin to question his judgment if he continues with this vendetta at this time. It’s not politics, it appears deeply personal and ill judged.
Do we really think that one Eton quip constitutes a ‘class war’? I don’t think so. He then goes on to says that we need to be the party that appeals to everyone. No we don’t! We are the Labour Party!
Sadly, when we lose the election Charles and his pals can blame Brown – when they actually need to look very closely at themselves. What a time to stir this all up again Mr Clarke!
100% agree , I think the worst is debate , Most adults can understand mature debate but switch of debate that is not , Maybe then ( and i mean maybe) Parliment would not have fallen as far .
Danny ( Or ricki or pedro :))
there was ment to be a smile after pedro on last post
Danny
What do you think could improve the poll ratings?
Pedro
Right now, I think a bit of humility, an intensification of the debate, a shift towards what Anthony wrote about earlier -- about uniting this country, not dividing it -- some mature politics where we can say "sometimes we're wrong an you're right". Lots of things.
Name Names , surly not Lord Mandleson?
Danny
The 1997 election was won because the nation wanted an end to Toryism plain and simple not because Blair had any more pulling power than Michael Foot.
Labour is best when it's labour, Blair opens his mouth about Iraq and the planned invasion and labour drops 6% in the opinion polls.
If you think the internal stuff? is tough Alex, then pray you close your ears to the real words if labour does lose the election. You see Alex you chose the party in 1982, many of use were born into the labour party and are hearts are still strong and the fight still remains.
My fight remains as well - more than ever. Recession concentrates need.
I think Obama is a good man but needs our help! the world has changed, YES! it's rejected capitalism and moved further to the rights of the peoples needs.Brown and Obama understand that concept.
Evidently, it is very unlikely as things stand that Labour will win the general election."
Your evidence for these assertions Alex?
You must be inside the insiders to know this stuff (no limerick intended)
The problem is he isn't. Andy Reed is.
As for Clarke. Promoted way above his station but this time he is right. But then so is Alex. The time has past. The PLP and cabinet have shown themselves to be totally spineless. The fact is that Brown is a total liability. Labour will lose the next election. end of story. In act its suicide to even hope for a hung parliament
Labour MUST start thinking of which way it wants to go at GRASS ROOTS level. The party has let the grass roots down. It simply doesn't get it because its been in power too long.
Much better to think about what sort of party WE want when the parasites that pretend to represent Labour are gone.
PS - lets hope Ed Balls loses his seat.
It may not appear so, but the best thing (for the long term) would be for Brown to stick around and delay any leadership election for at least 6 months. That would allow Labour to have an internal debate and listen to the grassroots BEFORE electing a new leader, rather than rush to get a new leader and then argue and fight amongst themselves.
The Tories are where they are today thanks to Michael Howard sticking around for a few months after the 2005 defeat. Look at what a hash they made of their rushed leadership elections in 1997 and 2001, then compare it to 2005. If we'd done it that way again we'd have had David Davis foisted on us, Blair would have made mincemeat of him and Gordon would have strolled to an election victory in 2007. Noone would have heard of that David Cameron bloke.
No one can deny David Davis' convictions: anyone who resigns their seat (and hence gets thrown off the front bench) to force a by election to be fought on a point of policy is a man with convictions. (Like those convictions or not, at least he has them.) The other David has shown that he does not have convictions and that he sways with the current political wind. Ask Cameron what he believes in and he has to ask a focus group first.
My prediction is that the real election will be in 2011. 2010 will create a hung parliament, and the government (probably minority Labour, but equally likely Lib-Lab) will limp along for a year. Cameron will not survive the backlash from throwing away an election that his grassroots (but not psephologists) thought should give him a landslide. Cameron would then announce that he will leave the Commons at the next election (2011) to continue his career in business. After a year no one will know who DC is or was.
The 2011 election will be the real election because the dividing line between Labour and Conservative will be broad, more because of a shift from the Tories than anything else. The Tories will be lead by a Hannanite (not necessarily the man himself, perhaps Carswell or someone similar), the "cast-iron guarantee" still smarts with the grassroots and the next time around they'll make sure that they pick someone who will keep to his policies. In this scenario, they will have the luxury of being able to choose a real Conservative candidate, rather than their current one who is very much "heir to Blair".
Labour will not have that luxury. If there is a minority administration then Brown will hang on and will lead the 2011 election, and when opposed by a real Conservative manifesto he may even have a chance of success. If there is a Lib-Lab pact a condition of the coalition may well be a new leader, and that will result in a Blairite leader.
So interesting times to come.
I really don't know. I would prefer the race to start now though. No one wants a weak opposition that spends a decade in fighting but thats exactly what Labour are heading for. MPs and PPC need to start speaking out now. The chances are that Labour will have a small pool to pick from after the next election so who knows?
I would hope that the the party doesn't swing too far left but then I don't want another bout of Blairism.
At the moment I see nothing to give me much hope TBH.
"Why wait until 3 months before an election to dump your leader? Why not last summer (when James Purnell gave you the perfect opportunity)? Why not the summer before that? Why not 2007 when Blair went? Three months before an election and you don't even know who your leader is?"
As a Tory supporter I say bring it on!
I have a plan b .
Danny
I will do , I hope he can resolve it .
Danny
We will sort it one way or the other ;)
Well i only sent just before christmas , So I guess he will get back to us after he comes back from recess.
Danny
Charles is damaged goods and most probably on the verge! squeezed by the reality of high office Charles has colaspe and now tinkers in off loading confused mixed messages.
Once again Charles, please stop trying to suck the soup with the straw.
Happy new year ( sorry i forot on the last post)
No offence taken , I have a choice New labour or the bnp in my seat, Can i suport new labour under the current cabnit and leadership ? No , I dont trust them .
Danny
sorry for swearing on here
Danny
I discussed your situation with Darren Rodwell and he knows someone who can help you. Unless Jon Cruddas has sorted out your problem. I will email the details to you tommorrow via Alex.
No I am not exotic , I did see the debate on the ira and islam which was missing the point i was trying to make , I only give my point of view , no spin or b******* , I am a Labour supporter but not a New Labour supporter (not anymore the class war was the final straw) , I dont know if you are saying what i post is scripted , that is C*** , I only come here after alex detoxicfied this sight and welcomed people for debate.
Danny ( Or ricki)
Just don't vote BNP. Please.
Pretty please?
Have a great new year Danny
You say "... we need a Labour government - not just the leader.", yet have accepted (as have all serious commentators) that Labour has zero chance of forming the next government under Brown's leadership.
Real politics has always been the art of the possible. Which is why David 'Dave' Cameron will be the next PM, as even 'traditional Tories' (most of whom consider Cameron a wet and wishy-washy progressive) will vote for him as they want a Conservative government even more than they want a new Tory leader.
I suppose that as you pack your belongings and trudge off into a poltical exile of Babylonian proportions you can console yourself that you were being 'loyal'....
"Many will say Charles Clarke is an irrelevance, that his time has been and gone, and that these attacks will do Labour more harm than good. I tend to agree with that last assessment. I've repeatedly made my own feelings towards Gordon Brown's leadership known - but the opportunity for change has surely passed"
Well said and I completely agree though I did initially supported GB I don't respect him now at all. Nonetheless, the die is cast.
We must go into this election battle (many will think it strange for me to say so as I am a big critic) positively with a view to helping and serving the electorate and bringing the definition of what it is to be Labour down to planet earth. People do tend to vote on planet earth.
For me the task is simple to focus on local issues that are of greatest concern to the people and also highligh what we are doing at the moment to improve their lives.
No Tory bashing or labour fanatasicm, just focussing on issues.
You can't polish a turd and so I try to avoid any mention of the conduct of the trash in Parliament who have brought shame on them all.
So far being a candidate has helped immensly and case work has already been dealt with and addressed. Practical solutions using the available bodies ranging from the police, CAB to the NHS and local charites and ensuring a satisfactory outcome is obtained.
I don't like Brown after his Conference lie. But I'll stick by the Labour Leader until the end, whatever that may be.
I won't do it blindly, I won't do it under a pretence or a self denial, or in fact a sense of bum licking sycophancy to anybody, I will go into this battle against the Tories and the BNP fully aware of the good and bad things this Government and the local Council have done and with my head held high.
These are the tough times and I, like many activists did not enjoy being made to look a fool in supporting crap MP's who betrayed us, some of whom still have the gall to stand once more.
It is these tough times though, that define us. They measure us and we have to take the flak with the positives. I know my values and they marry perfectly well with the Labour Party, it is my home and my fate. I could never be a Tory as I do genuinly like people and seek to help them whereever or whenever I can.
Time is the most precious commodity we all have, and how we spend it is the biggest decision we make with our lives. It is the greatest commitment when our actions are directed towards others and our time is spent well, it is after all the greatest of the economies and mine is directed towards getting as many Labour votes as possible over the next five months.
We will probably lose and certainly deserve to Nationally, but I promise the Tories one thing, they will have to work hard for every vote they want. I for one will not give them an easy ride into power and will do all that I can to defeat them in a long running and fair exercise in democracy.
My time is with GB and the Labour Party. Everyday for five months it will be my absolute priority. Anything less would be a diservice to those who need us.
No Tory bashing or labour fanatasicm, just focussing on issues.
I honestly think this is the way to win, the others are just a turn off.
Tell me what you believe in, how you can improve things, how you will do that, then deliver. If you get it wrong, say so, plan a way to correct it and then try again.
Tell me the truth and be open about what is happening.
A party (or MP) that does the above gets my vote.
It is working more importantly. We are getting a great deal of respect for it and more Labour vote pledges.
I will confess I am not Labour, but then I am not Tory or Lib Dem. I vote who I feel will do the best for my family, friends and the country and yes in that order.
1997 was a year of a lot of hope. I can remember back to 1978/79 and I was really hoping this time it would be different. That there would be no more lies, spin and sleaze. It started well...
I'm not sure replacing GB would work. Might get a few more seats but I think the Tories will win it although not by much. I think a lot of tactical voting will go on this time from those that bother to vote.
My concern is that if Labour did win and then failed to deliver, I think we could see the end of the party for a generation at least.
I'd agree on the articles. But on a forum like this the comments are really where people stsrt engaging, moving forward with their ideas, and learning stuff in the heat of battle.
I've appreciated your comments when I've seen them, and all power to your elbow for showing a passion for politics and a willingness to debate.
It's always a balance between dissent, diversity and some kind of common thread. I've had some really instructive times here in the last year, and some really wasteful ones too.
My fear is that it, under the top down moderated regime, it often revolves too much around the administrator. Alex does a fantastic job. But it's a job no one should have to do. There should be a way of us all hiding, moderating and recommending comments and articles. That's what happens on the best US blogs.
But I've been banging on about this since April, and won't bore you or Alex any further with my qualms
Have a great new year Hazico, and keep on keeping on. It's appreciated.
I hope you are not refering to me as a tory troll?
Danny
Absolutely not. The Tory Trolls I was thinking about were Guy and Mike Thomas, who seem to be the only survivors from the early days of LL. I've just defended your IRA/Hamas comparison with Guy, and of course he leapt off the deep end and says he loathes 'all Islam'. Mike Thomas is less fun.
Having read your posts recently Danny, I find it hard to believe you're really going to vote BNP. You're much smarter and more informed than your erratic (or was that erotic?) spelling indicates. And surely you know that many people, myself included, would not be considered really a citizen according to their charter. Their leader has also denied the holocaust. So I think you're making a point here, and you know what you're doing. But I'd never consider you a Tory troll. Something much more sophisticated and exotic.
Peace, goodwill, and have a great new year.
What's with these comment threads though? They still don't work in Chrome? And how come half the Tory trolls have disappeared (but only half) and meanwhile a lot of the Labour commenters have gone.
Hey. But LL survived. Kudos for that. I'd like to post more but this software makes it impossible to follow the flow.
But your article is great though. Perhaps you should give up the blogging admin and just become a writer.
Weird that comments don't work in your chrome. Our web guys use Chrome, too, so I'll have a word and see what's going on.
An on the commenters, maybe it takes a little time for news to spread that many of the more difficult commenters have moved on.
Mr Clarke has hit the nail on the head , Lets remeber that the lib dems (in there former glory used govern) , Is it possible that we could become the 3rd party soon ? With many independents and minor partys , We need change , Change of leadership , Change of culture in politics and respect for the voters .
Danny