By Alex Smith / @alexsmith1982
Perhaps intended to influence the secret PLP ballot that never happened - which Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt had hoped would occur on Monday - the timing of Peter Watt's broadside on Gordon Brown is another shot to the party at a delicate time.
Watt, the former General Secretary of the Labour Party under Tony Blair and until 2007, has said in a new book, press released to the Daily Mail for tomorrow:
* Douglas Alexander wanted an early election in 2007 because he feared delaying it would reduce the PM's popularity. The quote is: "we have spent ten years working with this guy, and we don’t actually like him. We have always thought the longer the British public had to get to know him, the less they would like him as well."
* On the day the 2007 election was supposedly due to be called, limousines were ready to take ministers on the campaign trail -- the election campaign was ready to go.
The first quote in particular is mindlessly - or deliberately - timed. But we should remember that these remarks are two years old. Like Peter Mandelson's emails to Derek Draper they rake over some known knowns and some known unknowns at a very sensitive time: an election in 2007 was called off and there were - and no doubt still are - doubts about Gordon Brown in the cabinet as elsewhere.
The most disappointing, but not surprising, aspect of tonight's revelations are how much of the party's money - £1.2million - was misspent on an election that never was. That's money that the party could have put towards the real thing.
But these revelations - no matter how harsh - should be lessons for the party as it prepares for an election that cannot be called off. They shouldn't be allowed to distract from the important tasks, and will be forgotten as quickly as this week's other events.
Tagged in: Movement, Election2010, History.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
There is no satisfaction to Guy M leaving the debate & thinking we just don't like Tories on here. I've often thought Guy was Guido or Ian Dale!
"Just tone it down a bit Guy"!
Hazico 28
I know you don't need me to back you as you have an excellent command of the English Language & you told Guy the truth & we will not accept his constant derogatory & aggressive terminology that he uses regularly to offer his definition of anyone who is a supporter of the Labour Party.
cheers
I always thought Guy was pretty much NewLabour with his enthusiasm for Iraq, Afghanistan and AGW.
In Scotland we see the Labour PLP undermining their own MSPs by agreeing with Wee Eck's plans for minimum alcohol pricing leaving Brown's place man 'Elmer Fudd' looking an even bigger Fudd than usual.
The Times is running a piece from Purnell in effect saying that others were supposed to resign with him, from the cabinet, but they 'bottled it'. The PLP / cabinet may as well commit 'sepuk' at the rate they are going but it is unlikely, as they do not have the guts!
Alex and Ralph - I fear this has gone past the point where sticking a finger in the dyke is going to stop the sea breaking through. Is there a plan 'B' to save what will be left or are those who don't care willing to accept that Cameron means an end of the Parliamentary Union with Scotland within five years?
The why? Because the recent Joseph Rowntree Foundation report is saying that Scotland has lower poverty and is now the most affluent part of the UK and already the usual Tory suspects are whinging about it. The Scottish response is that Barnett was always a fudge to cover up the real benefit of North Sea oil to Scotland and the UK.
The SNP's response is:
"..... Scotland’s share of public spending was lower than it should be, given the contribution of North Sea oil revenues to the Treasury. A spokesman said: “The only fair and acceptable alternative to the current funding arrangements for Scotland is full fiscal autonomy, enabling this country to compete on a level playing field with other nations, taking decisions in our own interests and maximising the opportunities that will come with the global economic recovery.”
Now the problem for Westminster is that 80% of Scots agree with Wee Eck and the SNP on this one.
The problem is that Field's ideas, though useful, would be very hard to enact and would inevitably be very expensive. They rely on universalist benefits and clawing back money via the tax system which is open to a lot of abuse and practical difficulties
I fully expect this restlessness amongst MPs to lead to one or two other "open debates" in the next few days from high profile characters, either against GB or (now possibly more likely) against the detractors within the party who have already come forward, like Purnell, Watt and the dynamic duo from last week.
For many party activists on the ground (and I suspect also on this site) this is a difficult time, both in being almost but not quite in electioneering mode, but also with the re-designation within the party of former friends as enemies causing some concern: how would an activist working for (and agreeing with) Purnell feel now that his MP has been branded by some as a "traitor" to the cause. Similarly there will be Labour-voters who view his latest comments as being reasonable, and therefore will be feeling defensive about debating with other Labour activists lest they get tarred by the same brush. As with any "agitated" situation, confusions and mal-assumptions can quickly escalate in these febrile times.
As for right-wing posters, such as Guy M, it is highly likely that comments that previously might have been debated, will now provoke far stronger responses - perhaps these questions are designed to expose and irritate any idealogical differences emerging from the Old-New Labour viewpoint; perhaps not - and anti-right-wing poster comments will be a safer position to adopt particularly if, as a Labour-supporter, one might feel unsure which side of any potential "divide" you might otherwise fall.
All of which is a long-winded way of saying: I personally think some of the responses to Guy may have been slightly harsh relative to his own comments (even if they are rather patronising on occasion), but at the same time he should not be surprised to be given a robust reponse at this difficult moment.
Meanwhile, the PLP need to quickly consider how best to channel all this nervous energy into something positive for the party.
I have also stated it is not the viewpoints that are in question, but the attitude and intentions of the poster.
I am an extremely open minded person with a sense of humour- but do believe in basic respect between people- whether it be via blogging or in person.
I bear no malice whatsoever to anyone with alternative views from Labour- but do object to put downs or aggressively worded comments from any quarter.
I think all of us should have respect for other posters, regardless of opinion- so long as expressed fairly and without deliberate provocation.
I do acknowledge your viewpoints, as any other poster on this site- but it is your style and apparent attitude which appear as continual "put downs."
Can you also not see that making incredibly patronising and demeaning comments about poorer people on a Labour site could not be seen as offensive to some?(or any other site for that matter.)
I don't believe these blogging sites are simply a free for all.We all share a responsibility to keep it reasonably respectful and for genuine intentions.Alex and his team are providing a great site for all our benefit- but also primarily its function is a Labour campaigning group.
I'm sure many would be far more willing to debate with you, if you could curb your automatic response to belittle others for their genuinely held values, and shared experiences?
Soemtimes listening can be useful- we can all learn something new out of the box.
I think the skill of debating is saying stuff without deriding others- probably being "assertive" rather than "aggressive".
I may not be a great fan of the Tory party, but one thing I don't do is make snide, sneering comments at anyone's expense.
It is not your viewpoint I object to Guy- but your whole attitude of contempt.
I really do question your purpose of spending so much time on this site, seeing as you have so clearly stated your "hatred" of all things Labour, and its supporters.
Gloating is simply not clever.
Where have I "sneered" at anyone?
I'm a marketeer - qualified CIM - who went into IT.
My background in segmentation tells me that those without home PC and broadband are likely to fall into a number of socio-economic segments of which the low paid or on benefits and holding low educational qualifications is the largest group.
That's not a "snide" comment at anyone's expense merely an analysis of social groupings.
If you think Labour party headquarters doesn't do similar in its targeting activities, especially with a limited budget, then you are naive.
My point was simply that if a lower % of Labour supporters have access to the internet and blogs in the UK then don't be surprised at a lack of left-wing bloggers.
You would disagree with this analysis at the time GB announces free laptops and broadband to the poorest?
You can end it anyone time you want.
If you allow a Tory to post then don't expect everyone to agree or get on all the time. But that's debate isn't it?
If you support a party that taxes my bracket heavily don't expect my views to match someone like Hazico's who believes we are not taxed enough.
There's an election coming and things will get frayed about the edges, but one thing I'll not do is pull punches or make personal attacks.
With me you get a Tory who is solo and debating, I suspect you'd like some of the major Tory commentators on the net on your site a whole lot less.
I don't personalise things or make attacks on individuals, unlike a number of your left wing posters do.
Show me where I say anything like:
"or whether it is for pure provocation..?
I may not be a great fan of the Tory party, but one thing I don't do is make snide, sneering comments at anyone's expense.
It is not your viewpoint I object to Guy- but your whole attitude of contempt."
in return to Hazico.
If you allow personal attacks don't be surprised when people defend themselves, and probably not as politely as I do either.
Either way it's your call mate, I care not.
I'll do you a favour and make this the last post I make on LL.
It's been fun and I understand fully that you need to moderate else some less than fair right-wingers would seek to destroy your site under a mountain of right wing diatribe.
However, if people respond to my posts, often robustly and sometimes personally then to my mind from a debate point of view there has to be the ability to reply freely (within limits on acceptability) and not be "rationed".
As I've said to you before, I think you can either have LL as a left leaning political debate forum or a "closed shop" for avowed lefties only. That's your free choice and from a web-site mangement point of view I have sympathy with the work needed to make LL run effectively given those choices.
Anyway, I'm done I think. It's been a pleasure debating with so many people, have fun.
I have seen other sites- eg in facebook, whre it is wall to wall support from genuine Labour and Liberal commentators.So each have to be seen in context.
First, the only thing I am embittered about is the inevitable failure of this Labour government who have repeated practically every mistake they have made in the past. I'm old enough to remember the 1970s adminstration and old enough to remember just how painful it was to correct those mistakes.
Lives are being lost and ruined by this administration. Millions of them.
I've also been here on LL since day one, have you? I remember taking Draper to task over Drapergate, the brave new vision for left-wing blogging started out as labelling people as racists.
I'm not so 'tribal' that where Labour have a good idea, I say so. Some of Chris Cook's contributions have been very good. However, there are a lot of peons to the faithful that frankly would make the most loyal spin doctor cringe.
As for Labour on the net, the socio-economic group that Labour claims to represent do have some of the lowest internet take-up rates amongst adults in the country.
UK Adult Media Literacy
It's there, the DE social group take up of the internet runs at 51%, the average is 73%.
So Guy M is right.
What concerns me is this is also reflected amongst the children of families in the DE social group, this will certainly impact their education and also deny them opportunities afforded to others. As the 0 laptop project gathered pace some years ago, I was puzzled that this government missed an opportunity to get involved to create a slightly higher-spec £100 laptop specifically for that aim.
It might also have created some tech spin off firms and the UK could sorely use some of those.
As a kid from a poor background growing up, I owe my interest in computers and my subsequent career to a microcomputer that cost £129 (albeit in 1983) bearing in mind an PC then cost the thick-end of £3000.
So perhaps if you weren't so quick to dismiss people as wrong just because they are not from the Labour party you might actually gather an appreciation of a different viewpoint from your own.
The OLPC laptop scheme was a superb opportunity which I sponsored. The problem was that Negroponte received very little support and then the partnership with Intel fell apart. As a supporter of OpenSource technology, I have pleaded relentlessly with educational institutions to go the way of OpenSource, but to no avail. Then, of course, the whole project was hijacked because of the predictable intervention of M$ which cut down XP for the netbook and we know that most people want M$ because that's all the know from cradle to grave. If anyone wants one, I have an OLPC under the buy one, get one scheme, although I had previously donated also to Negroponte.
You won in 2005 with 25% of the electorate
You scored around 16% in the Euro elections last year
The majority of those without pc and internet connection at home are Labour supporters
The final bit of "context" is that you will be stuffed in the GE in May
What proportion of the electorate voted? What was their composition? Psephological analysis into the turnout would be more informative, I think. There are two large elements, I would guess: (i) Euroscepticism (again, why doesn't K. Clarke say something?); (ii) some strange affinity with the ultra-right alliance of the Tories in Europe; (iii) Euro-agnosticism.
Europe, I would have thought, would be attractive to businesses - our principal trading partner. The Eurozone would have removed some of the instability of the 'over-exuberance' (Greenspan or, in common parlance, irresponsibility) of the Atlantic-model financial economy. European foreign policy would have mitigated these disastrous foreign escapades. We have engaged with France in an industrial entente cordiale which has had tremendous technological advantages: Eurotunnel and Concord. On this note, Eddie Stobart intends to deliver merchandise from Spain to the UK by high-speed rail as more effective and efficient, removing several hundred trucks from the roads. IMHO, it's time we abandoned this little Englander attitude and engaged more closely with Europe.
"You won in 2005 with 25%* of the electorate"
Turn the record off. please : no winning party since (and including 1945) has secured more than 40 per cent of the electorate.
Thatcher managed 33.4 per cent, 30.8 per cent and 31.8 per cent in 1979/1983/1987 : hardly a "ringing endorsement" from "the electorate" - for every person who voted for her, two or more didn't.
But - that's FPTP.
* Actually, it was 21.6 per cent of the electorate ; you can't even get your facts right ....
Hoon and Hewitt are Blairite throwbacks. They'e got nothing to gain under Brown and nothing to lose.
Despite all their efforts Mandelson and Darling are unable to scrape Brown off the ceiling where he is babbling about "Investment, Investment. Investment" despite the plain-as-day fact that if, the deficit isn't cut, the UK's credit rating will be downgraded leading to soaring interest rates, plummeting pound, and the onset of a real slump.
Hoon-Hewitt agree to to be set up as fall guys for a "plot"to bring Brown to his senses in turn for some greater reward in a revitalised Labour Opposition.
It seems to have worked, Darling has grown a spine in the last week.
Thats right; bury your head in the sand as we sail into oblivion. If you think that my opinion is a small minority then you are sadly deluded; there is a torrent of criticism both within Whitehall (witness the latest story this evening) and the wider party.
The only way to limit the damage of the next 6 months is to remove Brown, clinically set out what is required to address the current crisis and take the fight to an opposition; an opposition that quite frankly should be out of sight by now, but isn't!
Ignoring our greatest liability can only help the Tories; they're terrified that we'll actually go ahead replace Brown.
John Smith II
(Apologies to the original JS - regretfully I can't amend my name)
There is an element of truth in what you say John however many people are judging the labour party over the last 12 years and not just the past 2 years.
Remove Brown and replace him with whom John, another Blairite, remember John, many of our problems stem for Blair and his time in office.
Purnell, is trying the old Blair act today in the gaurdian, saying labour should move to it's core values, well, remember those early years when Blair would address conference and use the socialist word and call people comrades and do the old left wing speech to enthuse the crowd, then go back to Westminster and do the old tory act.
Something has got to change John, labour can't continue to be the conservatives in disguise, while the conservative try to embrace left wing ideaology disguise.
The electorate are confused and the majority feel let down, labour just isn't labour, while the tories will be the tories and the majority of the public will suffer more driving more and more apathy and people underground.
some people reading this independently for the first time today will be very confused at this post on a site for labour and left minded people
As for those who are too self interested in terms of what they can get for free from a Labour government, well they deserve nothing going forward from anyone with any sense.
I now regard any beggar, homeless person or big issue seller etc. as a Labour party supporter and as such they don't ever get a penny of my money.
As a few of us have said before, we get taxed enough and Labour want to do everything centrally at great cost, so you can deal with a fall I charitable donations ands make up the difference from your tax take.
Next time you see a homeless person on London's streets maybe I've just passed by and refused to them anything due to your grasping Labour government. Best open your own wallet if that's the case.
Hey, 'going forward' again - do all Tories use business-speak as their default language? Would it take much to just say 'in the future'?
Oh! C'mon Guy buy a LL tee shirt y'know y'want to be one of us.
I believe it would be good therapy for you & would help remove that awful chip on your shoulder or is it the heavy burden of being a Tory that causes the ranting & raving. That's why we don't want them elected Guy 'cause it looks like it's contagious verbal diarrhoea.
You take care of yourself and chill out! You need a rest by the sound of it!
cheers
What added incentive do we need? :-)
Clearly- old dynamics and splits amongst a small section of the party- they need to realise it's too damaging to the party as a whole.Do they want to lose?!
The leadership question will have to be addressed post election, if a larger number of MP's and the electorate think this is appropriate.
Stephanie
Elizabeth
Hazico
Dave
Gabe
Derek
Shibley
Alex
Sorry if I have missed anyone. Assuming generously another 5-10, that is dire. All over the Internet there is a torrent of people voicing their criticism of Brown.
Like
john smith
smith john
john
smith
smith with john
john with smith
smith on john
john on smith.
Have you heard the one about the one/man band John Smith?.
Everything that has been achieved over the last 12 years has been achieved despite Brown. He has been the festering cancer at the heart of our party; 10 years of destabilisation, dripping poison against the PM. He makes the current plotters look rank amateurs. When he finally gets the position he has schemed so long for, there is absolutely nothing of substance from him. Even now it has taken a abortive coup to get us to finally admit that we do actually need to cut public spending significantly; we all knew it, everyone knows it!!!
I do genuinely despair that our entire agenda, our hopes and aspirations, have been suborned to the overwhelming desire of one dysfunctional individual's need to be the top man.
Those who think Watts is being disloyal should remember this.
I think those on the left are particularly angry at these revelations because they have truth in them. It is not exactly a revelation that ministers and Labour MPs don't like GB. We all remember David Milibands statement on Question Time. Blairites hate him for his relentless anger at TB.
To be honest, this story is not particularly revelatory, we all know about the botched election and Brown's unpopularity. The problem for Labour is not the revelations but GB's continuous lying, about the election that wasn't and the necessity for budget cuts. Brown needs to realise that with all his enemies, lying is not an option.
I agree that voters do not care about the election that never was.
PS Guy – I happen to believe that GB should stay as PM. You’ll find that there are quite a number of us
as for tory hopes that the book may cause a storm, not mentioned on main news headlines a bit of a damp squid that the first part of the revolt totally flopped.
I also believe in Brown!
cheers
'Who will rid us of this turbulent priest?' Go now, in the name of humanity, Chas Clarke.
Good god, next it will be Groucho Marx and the Bullingdon Club - a Marx too far, I fear.
James Murdoch as Mae West to Cam'ron: 'Is that a spun in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?' or 'Come up and see me sometime, big toy.'
Perhaps they ought to remember that Marlowe and co cost their party two more elections, and these over-the-hill Blairites might well do the same thing. In their wildest dreams do they genuinely think that a Blair wannabe like D Miliband or Pur-nell would genuinely re-enthuse the core Labour vote?
They might like also to remember a lot of Major's rebels lost their seats - in that regard, I hope history does repeat itself.
'History allegedly repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce' (loosely in translation, as a famous proto-sociologist once said about the xviiith brumaire - although he actually didn't believe that history repeated itself and he plagiarized the phrase from his mate, Engels).
Agreed.
Further discussion about leadership should be after the election.
It only comes across as desperate, bitter, and self indulgent.
Dianne Abbott reiterated this point too on This Week.She said the vast majority of backbench MP's do not support these attempted coups and backbiting.
It certainly not good timing, and will undermine Labour chances of winning a fourth term.
Agreed I was listening to Diane too.
They want to according to Diane, get their own leader in by forcing a leadership contests either before or after the General.
These kinds of people do not belong in the Party not because of their political positions but because of the lengths their "self-undulgence" reaches and the methods they employ that are not in the interests, long or short of the Party.
Hazico this culture in the House is what I have been challenging on LL since I first logged on here. Because it has from the very beginning hampered the efforts of activists in Barking and Dagenham in ejecting the BNP.
They have hampered our efforts at every turn blinded by their own ambitions and conceit for others.
I agree though, this is not the time for it as the membership will turn on those who have done this to the Party as a whole and all they are achieving is their own destruction as they will be blamed, not Brown for losing the election should that occur.
Every activist/candidate at all levels knocking on doors will remember this, and they are the most important people in the Party who only an imbecile would offend.
They deserve our collective support, encoragement and thanks.
Let this be a lesson to us all about "bad culture" politics. Nepotism, self-interest and vain ambition will blight any political Party. From the very day GB "inherited" his position unchallenged.
For those of us who do not wholly love Gordon Brown must remember he is a symptom of a deeper problem. When he was allowed to "inherit" the leadership after Tony Blair many people were singing his praises, the left thought he would bring a more traditional and caring element back to the Party, the Centre liked him as an author of the New Labour Project as did the Right.
Of course now things have not turned out well the very people who supported his selection are turning on him because they do not "like" him. I cannot remember looking back, how many Prime Ministers I did ever "like".
During a General Election and Local election campaign we are working as a collective to see many people hopefully returned as representatives whose task it will be to ameliorate the damage done as Central Government cuts the purse strings. Our duty will be to ensure the most needy and vulnerable are protected.
Are we all to stop then because we have a poor PM? Are we to cease in our fundamental beliefs because some of the PLP are blubbing about a situation which I have no doubt has more to do with their own political positions than the good of the Party, the Party which many of them used to enrich themselves.
I really do feel for people who do not appreciate Gordon Brown, I am one of them.
But I equally do not have any sympathy whatsoever by the selfish actions being brought to bear at this of all times by people who I have yet to see do anything in their political lives to benefit others and not themselves.
The very challenges in the PLP are as dirty a bunch as GB ever was.
Neither camp have anything to be proud about.
Now they can try something new to them. They can get off their backsides and try and help those of us who do have genuine dreams and beliefs for this country, who are cleaning up their mess (BNP), and who are and always will place the Party before their own interests.
It is time they joined the Labour Party.
The country has decided some 40% of them will soldidly vote Conservative..
The Labour/FD/Greens split is more fluid .
Any labour supporter who still supports Labour now has obviously accepted that Gordon Brown is their leader and his personal conduct is appropriate to a Leader of a democratic party. So they will not change. On that basis , any criticisms they make of Tory conduct are just compared with Browns.. end of argument.
So all you have left is floating voters.
The conduct of Labour in the past 12 months on a number of issues hardly appeals to any floating voters..
The Times says the RAF leaked the stuff on the helicopters but that is unlikely as they do not control access to the media, so this could only come from Ainsworth or some of his PLP pals or civil servants and not Hoon.
Just how many enemies in the cabinet have Gordon and Ed Balls created?
I agree the Labour Party is now stuck with Hobson's choice as far as Gordon is concerned but the PLP is clearly a mess, the genie is out of the bottle and while Mandelson has now got Gordon where he wants him, Mandelson has clearly been unable to put the stopper back in.
The question now must be is the plan to force Gordon to walk, triggering an early election to wrong foot the Tories?
... and if he had said that he would not, then there would have been cries such as: 'oh, but we don;t know for whom we are really voting'.
The lies are all unravelling. The vileness at the heart of the Labour leadership is unravelling. The incompetence and lack of planning in government is unravelling.
Even Labour supporters are starting to wake up to the train wreck.
The General Election is about one thing: Vote Anyone But Labour
The only people left standing are Labour's equivalent of Germany's Werewolves of WWII.
First question up... quote Brown showing he lied over helicopter purchases
Second question up.. quote Brown showing he lied over calling an election in 2007
Third question up... quote Brown showing he lied over "cuts"
and on and on.
Cameron and Clegg would have a field day with him. By that stage more will have come out as well via The Mail.
Does any Labour supporter seriously expect that this will help the cause at the next election?
'Vote Labour: Five more years of Gordon'
Unless this loser is ditched(and fast), oblivion awaits in May.
IS YOUR CAPS LOCK STUCK?
Alex, you cannot afford to be so naive.
Don't you get sick and tired of being an apologist for your wretched leader?
'....they rake over some known knowns and some known unknowns...'
I didn't realise Donald Rumsfeld could be a source of inspiration to anyone;)
Happy Birthday.
A famous quote comes to mind:-
" Those of whom you thought unkindly oft become your closest friend" and these words are apt to the people who supported Blair & spoke out against Brown at the time, ie, Alexander, Mandelson & the rest who now support the PM.
I believe Tony's supporters were showing him loyalty when they spoke out against Brown who was favourite to take over.
Blair had his supporters & it shouldn't surprise anyone that they spoke out against the person most likely to replace him & that was Brown. In any working envirememt people don't like change.
This kind of behaviour ie "Labour airing it's dirty linen in public" is not new It is a Labour party trait & some of us believe it is more healthy & the Tories are pretending they are united. Cameron says he has a strong team. Who are they? There is only four names at the most that people in the Country know---Cameron,Osborne,Hague,Clarke.
Cameron says his party has changed. They have not changed they are the Tories of old & the people will never trust them with our Public services especially our NHS.
REMEMBER:-
The only affluent Tories who use the NHS are the ones who have health conditions that Private health Insurance doesn't cover.
... and strange bedfellows they are. Three Eurosceptics and a Europhile who lost the leadership election at the PLP stage because of his predilection for Europe. The only unity there is, is the unity of 'place men' (sic). The Tory Clarke should be as ashamed of himself as the 'Labour' Clarke. Kenneth 'Gis a job' Clarke.
Imagine Mandelson saying to Tenant.........You look like Me!.
Imagine Mandelson saying to Tenant.........You look like Me!.'
Yes, that's right Derek, and what inspired Bleasdale? - those damnable Thatcher years. Of course, some here will dismiss Bleasdale as just another luvvy, but he was the bard for those times. Now what have we got?: Little Britain with Vicky Pollard and that other unprincipled woman (sorry, can't even remember her name, she's so undistinguished), and so on, caricaturing, stereotyping, parodying, and pissing on the poor and unfortunate. What a cruel f+++++g world.
By the way, got any salt!.....
You write this as if it were a fact. It is, however, just your opinion. And a demonstrably wrong opinion at that.
All the recent opinion polls, including today's ICM poll in the Telegraph, show "the people" trust the Tories more on the NHS than Labour, by a fairly wide margin of 43% - 35%.
You may wish that the Tories haven't changed, and that "the people" think they will destroy the NHS, but it appears that not many people share your views.
Talking to my staff I am shocked how few have a fear about the Tories coming in. If they are under 30 or even 35 they have not worked under a Tory government.
Happy birthday
Danny
Good! Perhaps we'll have an end to the constant updates on the Ralph Baldwin saga.
Maybe you could write a book about it?
I suspect that many who post hear are not actually aware of how bitter the medicine is. Between 500,000 and 1m Public Sector jobs are on the line. Now that for each that loses his means of income is real misery as he/she have little chance of finding alternative employment. So please Shibley et al, concentrate on important issues and forget the flim flam.
It seems that sleaze is now rife amongst PRE-MPs, or at least prospective Tory MP Zac Goldsmith:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8450410.stm
Of course, it is doubtless a "misuunderstanding". Oh yes!
One final point, why is it that so many "Labour" figures like Watt, and in the past Blunkett and other true Blairites always choose The Mail to spill their bile?
Because it has a circulation of over 2 million and pays very well.
Plenty of "exposes" also get published in the Sunday Times too. For similar reasons.
They will never learn.....
"No-one I know cares about the election that never was, and what someone possibly-maybe said in private two years ago." Perhaps your friends don't care, but the electorate clearly cared. There was a direct correlation between Brown backing down from an election, and Labour's slide in the polls.
You might think that it is a none story, but Peter Watt is alleging that Brown Lied on national TV, amongst other things. That is a story that will resonate with the electorate. It's pretty simple. When asked to associate a word with Brown it will be 'liar'.
He lied to the nation and now he has been outed. He is finished. It astonishes me that anyone could even contemplate defending him.
The sooner the PLP grows a spine and gets rid of him, the better, for both the party, and the nation.
"In summary, tough. I am still voting Labour. I agree it's shocking but it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference to me."
Then I put it to you that you a party man, rather than a man of principle.
Is that all the Labour party has left? People so eager for a scrap of power from the big table, that even though they can see that Gordon Brown is a poor PM, they'll still vote for him because he's "Labour".
No wonder the electorate hold this morally bankrupt party in utter contempt.
This will be ongoing (I have just read the article). It raises many issues indeed. Will the campaign be coherent if run by Ministers or will they fail to work as a team?
How much pressure will continue to flow Gordon Brown's way?
I think Peter Watt was treated badly but he is not just attacking the PM now and he should be ready for quite a lot of stick (not from me).
This may well play towards the defeat of Gordon Brown at a General Election and his departure as leader, clearly the Blairites want one of their own in as they know Labour tend to stick to their leaders so they are more than happy to accept opposition and control of the Party.
Personally I think the Party would be better off without the lot of them. Childish maniacs obsessed with power and control.
It is unlikely that things will deteriorate further but it is clear the Blairite attacks on Brown will continue through the election.
Ironically they had better be careful as they are attacking their own party too and may be seen as undermining the work of the majority and any future leadership bid after the General Election may involve quite a few candidates and the members will not want anyone who is as ambitious as Gordon Brown was Blairite or otherwise.
Sad times and obviously very discouraging. I hope I never meet these very selfish and reckless people who appear to be as bad as Brown.
The gloves are off Ralph!
Thankfully Westminster were not involved. The members thought I was not good enough and that is fair enough. It is unlikely that I shall bother again due to happiness and health. I intend to retain the former and the latter lol!
I won't but who is a Blairite and who is not ?
front runners (IF elected !!)
Milliband bros - guess so
Alan Johnson - plays between the two I guess
Ed balls - nope but seen as unelectable
see those 4 as the front runners, so is it a Milliband /Johnson fight ?
Some of them are frankly
sad
- well never mind. I posted on Iain Dale's thread that the Daily Mail would not be publishing this unless they were sure about their soruce(s). Iain is indeed right to call it shocking. Overall, the journalism on the Daily Mail in my opinion is actually very good. I may even buy it tomorrow. I may even buy the book. But it won't make the blindest bit of difference. Nor do I think will it affect the overall outcome, which looks like a slim majority with an Ulster Unionist mob to keep theTories in power (according to both Dale and the Telegraph, independently). In summary, tough. I am still voting Labour. I agree it's shocking but it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference to me.
"I agree it's shocking but it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference to me"
Perfect example of how far the Labour party has fallen and how far they've dragged the UK with them.
Laughing a lot here reading your posts.
Gordon Brown has been shown to have lied repeatedly to the commons and nation.
He has been shown to be unable to take decisions and has enough traits of someone with mental health problems that the questions about his health will re-emerge.
On top of all that the entire Labour machine is split from top to bottom and the in-fighting is getting viscious.
But amongst all this, you think it is doing Brown good, the party is behind him and the country can't wait to elect him....
Posts from the Far Side....
"Away and raffle yer head Guy, if you were a football i'd volley you into orbit, yer heads full of wee men and there all running the wrong way. get a grip you hoolagan"
Late night at the pub for you I take it?
He's had ten years at the Exchequer, and two and a half years as PM, and we're mired in the worst recession ever.
Now for the policies?
Give me strength.
Please, Britain - anyone but Brown. The nation cannot take five more years of this incompetent, socially inept, imbecile as our leader.
Many happy returns!
What matters is that he's a bumbling incompetent who has brought this country to its worst ever recession, and is hated by those within and those outside his own party.
If the Labour party have the hubris to try and get him elected (for the first time), then they will suffer a landslide defeat from which they truly may never recover, like the Liberals did in the early 1920s.
You really do show yourself up to be the worst of the electorate, continually trumping up the same party no matter how much damage they have done to our country. It truly is sickening.
The reason the Hoon letter didn't really damage Labour in the polls is that, ultimately, people don't care about frothy Westminster stories.
No-one I know cares about the election that never was, and what someone possibly-maybe said in private two years ago. People care about issues that affect them, their families and their life and their careers. This guy was forced to resign as general secretary, and was probably quite angry about it.
I just hope the Daily Mail, Peter Watt and the publishers spend the revenues on something nice!
This is not a non-story, it is a story of a lack of honesty, morals, scruples and a total lack of clear leadership.
This isn't the Shepton Mallet WI, this is the political leader of this country.
I don't find it a non-story that he is totally incapable of making a decision. That is something I find immensely worrying. These aren't decisions like Marmite or Jam on my toast.
On the major decisions of the last three years, Brown has flunked every single one and self-inflicted huge damage on himself in the process.
It also tells a story that the Cabinet is irrevocably and permanently split and a PM that is universally despised by his entire cabinet.
That's not froth, listen.... you can hear the final credits rolling...
except the MP's saw through it, none wanted it and now, and the blairtes in lieu of their man's appearance at the enquiry shortly are being shown as bitter and twistedm really only helps brown in some ways.
the level of your denial is only surpassed by Brown ineptitude.
Wishful thinking on your part.
If all this is true then Gordon Brown is unfit to hold the office of PM and I think the country will ensure he pays the price in May
Edited my comment and I am going to retract it completely.
;)
Activists work for Labour, Brown works for his own good.
What purpose does it serve if loyal activists working for the good of the country elect a narcissistic imbecile such as Brown.
I was not supporting Brown.
I could not care less about him (though I promised not to bad mouth him on this site during the election).
I am just fed up with the madness at Westminster. Obviously I am Labour so I am more worried about my own Party than any other.
People are working hard in the bitter cold for the Party now John and don't need this kind of stuff about ANY elected member of the party.
Winds me up a tad. Why don't they just go to Brown's Constituency and deliver leaflets for the SNP or Tories if they hate him so much. That way it won't interfere with anyone elses campaign.
I do not understand why you have promised not to bad mouth him, this is the UK not Iran.
In your second paragraph you contradict yourself totally. If you are worried about your party then you must fight the megolamaniac at number 10..
Lastly, Gordon Brown is the PM this is politics on a national scale. Your activity on the doorstep helps you get elected but also Gordon Brown. The splits and plots will now accelerate. It looks to me as if Gordon Browns Gestapo have lost control and we are headed for a resignation in shame or a back me or sack me election. If we still had a parliamentry democracy, we would never have been in this state as the party would have exerted more control over the control freak.
If I were an activist now I would stay in bed. The change from within bringfs too much with it to be worthwhile. Who would want to re-elect this fool again?
No John this is called an election campaign. I promised not to bad mouth Brown because it does not help. What you seem to fail to grasp in your overzealous and unreasoning dislike of Brown is that everything we do now has an impact.
The moral of activists is very important in Constituences across the country including the Constituences where MPs oppose Brown.
Any internal attacks against any Labour MP by any Labour MP hurt everyone and make the Party look disunified and helps the Tories.
Do you remember the Tories and the BNP John?
Or is is all about Brown for you?
As I said and as I keep on saying my thoughts are with the members and I do not care about Brown.
It is not a contradiction, it is a choice. You might enjoy using a dagger and taking personal pleasure in exacting revenge on a man who may well deserve it, but this is not just about him and if you were capable of seeing beyond your vendetta and at the bigger picture you would realise this.
I need the Labour Party to be strong.
I came onto Labourlist to defend the good things and condemn the bad things (ususally the PLP inclusive of their chosen leader).
This is because such MP's give more ammunition for the BNP for the Tories etc etc.
A local AND general election campaign.
Local John. The PLP chose Brown, they did not even challenge him and for them to attack their leader is a complete farce, for them to do it at election time is nothing more than completely treachery to the interests and goals of the whole Party.
This election is about a lot more than who leads the Labour Party. It is about councils across the country and about candidates across this country.
Are you suggesting that the whole lot should just stop because GB is a fool and John Smith does not like him?
Exactly so, Ralph. It is about the policies wtih which Labour can make this country a better place than just for a closed social elite.
Therefore, Labour by a significant minority is being seen as weak and disorganised.
Someone did in fact make the point last night that Kissinger had awarded the Foundation medal to Brow. On mty enquiries todaty, I found out, the G20 had unanimously praised Brown and George Soros/OECD/IMF/Obama had praised Brown for his action in the recession.
I think that this is all the more important given that another media onslaught will begin shortly with Hoon saying that Brown 'vetoed' his defence budget. This is clearly nonsense because e could have resigned from the Cabinet if he vehemently disagreed.
Anyway, I think you've acted with great dignity, we've all got our different agendas. I've got mine with my 200 odd after one day on FB and you all have yours. We should at least converge on not voting Tory, one would have hoped.
We have got to get out of the habit in vassilatiing in an orgy of introspection over any tit-bit that Blair or Brown may or may not have done, with every titbit scandal that is posted here or elsewhere. We should focus on securing a Labour victory. If we don't, nobody else certainly will.
How can you continue to "work" for a PM who is such a blatant bare faced liar?
How can you "work" for a PM who it seems is detested by most of his cabinet?
How can you "work" to have such an appalling PM re-elected to misgovern for another 5 years?
Is your party so lacking in morals you will go to the polls in May with Gordon Brown, publicly acknowledged compulsive liar, as your candidate for PM?
How can you even think of putting him up in a televised debate?
Easy to answer.
I am not. I am helping defeat the BNP and Labour are best placed to do this in Barking and Dagenham. It is a bit more practical and local for me ;)
My main concern is seeing the councillors win their seats!!
This stuff from No10 and the Cabinet and the Leadership is pie in the sky.
I think after the election should I not be voted in I will be thinking about my position in the Party, because if I am elected I will have a duty loyally to serve under the Labour Party banner and will do so happily as many of the candidates are lovely hard-working people.
As I said my prime role is to see the councillors elected, not necessarily myself and when this is all over I will consider my life and where it is going. I think the Labour Party may be going in a different direction to me. Not locally but nationally most certainly. You all know me know I think, self-interest in power turns me off and I always wanted to serve the people not lose the plot.
I always find conceit and self-interest distasteful and too many Labour PLP candidates seem to have them in abundence.
Not my thing Guy. I gave becoming a Labour Parliamentary candidate my best shot but as I have said before only a fool sticks around where he is not wanted and fights undefeatable battles.
Not when there is a loife to be led and more lovely people to meet, the World is my oyster ;)
I have to say that I never thought I'd see the day when the mess of infighting and bad blood that had gone on from Thatcher's removal all through Major's years could ever be beaten for sheer political blood letting, butchery and payback.
I was wrong, what currently passes for the Labour "party" and "government" has managed to out do anything the Tory party could have dreamt up at that time.
Yes I still have a number of the interviews on old VHS tapes, would you like copies made?
they are doing everything they can through the Tory press to back up their plan, except it failed at the first hurdle.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6982440.ece
Basically claiming that Brown "vetoed the purchase of vital military helicopters."
"Leaked ministerial letters reveal how, as chancellor, Brown repeatedly prevented Hoon from ordering life-saving battlefield equipment for Afghanistan and Iraq."
"The leaked letters show Brown personally overturned earlier Treasury assurances that the Ministry of Defence would be free to spend extra cash on troop-carrying helicopters for Iraq and Afghanistan."
There was a point yesterday on LL about whether someone is telling a lie or not.
All this is showing is that being a blatant liar may not be the worst of Brown's failings.
Gordon Brown is likely now a dead man walking politically
Brown is finished. Anyone who still has an once of respect for him should be sectioned.
Please do not put the knife in, Alex is already having serious issues with his emotions on this one.
How does the saying go? It is much safer to be feared than loved.
I have to say having read through some of the content that this is about as bad as it could get for Gordon Brown.
It is absolutely damning, I've never read anything that comes close about a PM, in office or not.
To my mind this is timed to ensure there is no way Labour can switch leaders before the GE and as such you will truly be a government of the living dead with a zombie PM for the next 4 months.
If what Iain Dale says is correct about the "top of the iceberg" then your government might just be finished here and now.
As we saw on Tuesday are they worried about something ?
Is Watt still a party memeber, was he ever one ?
If so I hope the card gets taken off him straightaway.
Maybe Brown getting further and further away from the Blair faction is good, considiring how badly Blair's appearance at the enquiry will be.
"Loyalty is a two way street"
There are occasions when the paid official takes the blame to protect the party or the politician but here is someone who seems to have been brutally hung out to dry to protect Gordon and Harriet at the level were from his perspective they were encouraging the Police to arrest him!
Months after the events when the police decide not to prosecute, that is seen as BAD by some at the top of the party as it would have been better if he had been jailed. Now that is harsh, no wonder he is bitter!
The most disappointing, but not surprising, aspect of tonight's revelations are how much of the party's money - £1.5million - was misspent on an election that never was and the parallel of how much money Gordon has sprayed into the economy trying to get relected. That's money that the party could have put towards the real thing and money the country will have to pay back over the next 20 years killing public services.
And believe me, what the Mail has covered today is but the top of the iceberg.
I accept that, of course, but we've known for months that there was likley to be a final mutiny in January. And from a Labour perspective, the publication of this book and these remarks in a paper as incendiary as I know you agree the Mail can be is seemingly deliberately awkward timing. That's fine and of course your prerogative; it's the job a publisher to maximise sales. But from Peter Watt's perspective, you have to agree that this is unhelpul and unneccesary timing.
Perhaps Peter Watt had little say in when the book was published - but even then he knew it would be more profitable in terms of book sales to feed into the narrative of Gordon Brown as an awkward leader.
Like I say, that's not news to most of us.
Alex
That's clutching at straws. Awkward timing? For the 30% of people who want to vote Labour.
What about the other 70%?
Also, do you seriously think that if the parties were turned Labour would be less 'awkward' with the timing?
As for a 'final mutiny'? That's quite an exclusive you sat on.
They should first apologise as accessories to Browns crimes, every last one of them.
Gordon had form before he was PM.
John Hutton in 2006 said Brown would be a f-ing disaster as PM.
So sorry Derek, I think you should step away from the pom-poms.
Oh please do try to floor me.
He is a Labour MP, elected by the people to represent them. As for the grassroots, it's not me being taken for a complete fool.
What is a 'Labour Man' do you allow women the vote in your party?
Mike...go and blow son!
Plus it is a bit rich when large chunks of your own party think GB is a useless nasty fool that you are going to spend 4 months no trying to foist him on the UK for another 5 years.