Monday, November 13, 2006

Contest lacks the Footie factor

There are two recurring themes I have noticed in recent blog postings about the Labour leadership contest. Firstly, the unfavourable comparisons that have been made between the current crop of contenders and the stellar line-up in the race to succeed Harold Wilson in 1976, and secondly, the related issue of the current lack of a recognised leader of the left.

As Mike Smithson pointed out on PoliticalBetting.com today, the '74-76 Wilson Government contained an extraordinary concentration of political talent, with no fewer than six Cabinet "big beasts" putting themselves forward for the leadership.

They included both Michael Foot and Tony Benn from the left of the party - two acknowledged giants besides whom the current-day lefty hopefuls Michael Meacher and John McDonnell are mere political pygmies.

So is it because the left has been effectively marginalised under the current leadership - "Exit Hard Left Pursued By Blair" as one memorable newspaper headline put it a few years back? Or has the left just been desperately unlucky in that all those who might have become its standard-bearers have, in some way or another, fallen by the wayside?

I would contend that, by and large, it's the latter. While Mr Blair clearly does have a very different attitude to party management to Mr Wilson, preferring to lead from the front rather than trying to hold warring party factions together, I do not think he would have excluded the likes of Robin Cook or Clare Short from his Cabinet had they not decided to exclude themselves.

Either of Cook or Short could have gone on to establish themselves as the leader of the anti-war left, and thereby become a significant player in the forthcoming contest. But Cook sadly died, while Short threw away her position by her increasingly bizarre behaviour.

But if Gordon Brown's chances have been boosted by the lack of an obvious rival from the left, he has been even more fortunate in the trials and tribulations that have befallen his potential opponents on the right of the party.

If Alan Milburn had lived up to his early promise and not flounced out of government twice, if David Blunkett hadn't self-destructed after straying too far from his working-class roots, if Charles Clarke had developed some political finesse to go with his undoubted ability....then Brown might now be facing a much stiffer fight.

The 1976 contest was of course won by the centrist figure of James Callaghan after the two wings of the party cancelled eachother out. In particular, he benefited from the divisions between Roy Jenkins, Denis Healey and Tony Crosland, the Gaitskellite Friends and Rivals who could not agree which of them would be the candidate.

What today's Labour Party really lacks is not so much a Foot as a Crosland, someone who can provide some sort of intellectual framework for a left-of-centre government in the early 21st century. David Miliband probably comes closest - but he is one for next time round.

unique visitors counter

Blair cannot escape shadow of sleaze

Avoiding the temptation to write about the US elections, I returned to thye cash-for-questions affair in my latest column and accompanying Podcast this weekend.

As Mike Smithson speculates, the ongoing inquiry - which ministerial spinners assured us would be completed by now - could play an increasing important part in determining Tony Blair's departure date.

"Given the rate at which the wheels of British justice turn, it is reasonably unlikely that any charges will have been brought by the time Mr Blair leaves office as scheduled next summer.

"But the prospect of having the ongoing inquiry overshadow his final months in office has led some to speculate that Mr Blair could yet surprise us all and go early."


unique visitors counter

Friday, November 10, 2006

Has Johnson really quit the race?

Unlike Ben Brogan, I don't seriously believe Alan Johnson plans to do a U-turn and come back into the Labour leadership race - but I have to say that his new campaign website launched today had me wondering a bit.....

Yesterday, Johnson made clear he would be backing Gordon Brown, describing the Chancellor as a "towering political figure" and praising his "gravitas, experience, and intellect."

Fair enough, but somebody should have told the person putting together the media section of his new website which seems to be slightly off-message in this respect.

It currently contains the following stories, all seemingly promoting the idea of Johnson as a candidate not for the deputy leadership, but as a rival to Gordon for the top job.

"Alan Johnson displayed his leadership credentials to the Labour Party conference yesterday when he announced plans to restore confidence in school exams and to help children in care." Greg Hurst, The Times

"When the backstabbing finally stops, could Alan Johnson be the man who delivers the fatal blow to Brown?" Rachel Cooke, The Observer

"For many Labour MPs he represents the perfect alternative to the Chancellor, being everything that Mr Brown is not." Anthony Browne, The Times

"Gordon Brown's enemies are pinning their hopes on Alan Johnson." 'Bagehot," The Economist.

November 13 Update: This was post was picked up over the weekend by both PoliticalBetting.com and The Daily, both of whom provide interesting angles on it. On balance I tend towards The Daily's verdict that it was an unintended hangover from Johnson's earlier plans to contest the leadership, rather than Mike's interpretation that AJ might re-enter the race at some stage.

unique visitors counter