When Hilary Benn first entered the race for Labour's deputy leadership, there was near-universal agreement among the pundits that he had immediately become the man to beat, such is the breadth of his appeal in the party. Although essentially a man of the "soft left" by background, the International Development Secretary was also expected to garner support from Blairites impressed by his modernising credentials as well as old-style lefties with a sentimental attachment to the Benn name.
His popularity among ordinary party members seemed to be borne out by (admittedly totally unscientific) online polls such as the one carried out on this blog and another currently running on the Political Penguin blog, both of which show Benn and Jon Cruddas as the clear frontrunners.
But if those polls are in any way representative, there would appear to be a clear discontinuity between the views of Labour MPs and the views of the party's grassroots members on the deputy leadership issue. According to this story in yesterday's Times, it is Alan Johnson who is making the running in the PLP, with Benn struggling even to get his name on the ballot paper.
I've no reason to doubt the truth of this, but what it highlights are the complexities of trying to predict an election involving an electoral college made up of three very distinct parts, particularly where one of those constituent parts (the MPs) has the ability to kill a challenge.
The general consensus about Benn seems to be that if he does get on the ballot paper, he will do well, and could still win. But if he doesn't, and Peter Hain does, the Northern Ireland Secretary could well end up hoovering up the soft-left votes that might otherwise have gone to Benn.
Others have made the point that if the May elections go spectacularly badly for Labour, it will further strengthen the hand of Cruddas, the anti-establishment candidate who has alreayd won significant union and grassroots backing.
This also has an impact on the ongoing speculation about the shape of Gordon's Cabinet. Benn says he's not interested in being "Deputy Prime Minister" but if he wins it would be hard for Brown to deny him the Foreign Office. Both Hain and Johnson though seem more keen on the DPM title.
To complicate matters even further, there are rumours that Caroline Flint is also preparing to run. To which I can only say, bring it on, Caroline!
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Pot. Kettle. Black
It's not often I defend David Cameron's Tories, but this comment from Noel Gallagher, songwriter with Beatles Tribute Band Brits Lifetime Achievement Winners Oasis, is up there with Mr Tony himself in the hypocrisy stakes.
"They wait to see what Tony Blair says...and then they move in behind and switch it and change a little bit. It's like a song writer who's eternally ripping off someone else's song and just changing the odd line a little."
"They wait to see what Tony Blair says...and then they move in behind and switch it and change a little bit. It's like a song writer who's eternally ripping off someone else's song and just changing the odd line a little."
The Brits Ain't What They Used To Be
I have to admit to being slightly disappointed by the outcome of this year's Brit Awards, not just because sparkling Lily Allen (pictured) lost out to dreary Amy Whinehouse for Best British Female, but also because that the ceremony failed to live up to its past reputation for cock-ups and general bad behaviour.
Everything seemed terribly polite and well behaved compared to, say, John Prescott having a bucket of water emptied over his head by Chumbawamba*, Jarvis Cocker invading the stage during Michael Jackson's Earth Song, the KLF dumping a dead sheep outside the ceremony (their original plan having been to slice it open on stage), and Lisa Stansfield's rant against the first Gulf War in 1991.
Perhaps my favourite memory, though, was Sporty Spice Melanie Chisholm telling the loathsome Liam Gallagher to "come and have a go if you think you're hard enough" from the podium after he criticised the Spice Girls in 1997.
Eat your heart our, Arctic Monkeys and Co. They don't make pop stars like that any more.
*Token Political Reference for those who get annoyed by my occasional descents into "trash blogging."
**Hat Tip: Giles C
Everything seemed terribly polite and well behaved compared to, say, John Prescott having a bucket of water emptied over his head by Chumbawamba*, Jarvis Cocker invading the stage during Michael Jackson's Earth Song, the KLF dumping a dead sheep outside the ceremony (their original plan having been to slice it open on stage), and Lisa Stansfield's rant against the first Gulf War in 1991.
Perhaps my favourite memory, though, was Sporty Spice Melanie Chisholm telling the loathsome Liam Gallagher to "come and have a go if you think you're hard enough" from the podium after he criticised the Spice Girls in 1997.
Eat your heart our, Arctic Monkeys and Co. They don't make pop stars like that any more.
*Token Political Reference for those who get annoyed by my occasional descents into "trash blogging."
**Hat Tip: Giles C
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Happy Valentine's...
Chairman of the Lobby Adam Boulton has today struck a blow for serious political journalism by nominating his Top 10 Most Fanciable MPs which for the sake of completeness includes some male Parliamentarians even though Adam himself is robustly heterosexual. It is disappointing that neither Jonathan Calder, Guido Fawkes, or Iain Dale have risen to the challenge to produce their own lists, but here for the record is mine!
1 Yvette Cooper
2 Caroline Flint
3 Julia Goldsworthy
4 Celia Barlow
5 Claire Ward
6 Helen Southworth
7 Justine Greening
8 Alison Seabeck
9 Lynne Featherstone
10 Joan Ryan
Nos 1 & 2 may well figure among my tips to be in Gordon's first Cabinet - but on the grounds of ability, rather than looks, I hasten to add.
For a further Valentine's Day treat, click HERE for "Gweirdo's" take on recent events in the Blogosphere.
1 Yvette Cooper
2 Caroline Flint
3 Julia Goldsworthy
4 Celia Barlow
5 Claire Ward
6 Helen Southworth
7 Justine Greening
8 Alison Seabeck
9 Lynne Featherstone
10 Joan Ryan
Nos 1 & 2 may well figure among my tips to be in Gordon's first Cabinet - but on the grounds of ability, rather than looks, I hasten to add.
Thinking the Unthinkable
Frank Field used to be one of my favourite MPs, a Christian socialist not afraid to speak his mind. But after his contribution to the Labour leadership debate today I am reminded of Clem Attlee's memorable retort to Harold Laski: "A period of silence from you would now be welcome."
Writing in today's Guardian, Field argues that it is time for Labour to skip a generation to David Miliband, arguing that Gordon Brown's position as leader-in-waiting arises merely from a misguided sense of indebtedness to him for not splitting the party last time round rather than any assessment of his ability.
As that astute observer David Herdson has pointed out on Political Betting, Field's article comes over more as a justification for not electing Brown than an argument for electing the Boy David.
Coming in the wake of last Thursday's astonishing gaffe on Question Time last Thursday - which will be used mercilessly against Gordon by the Tories - it also displays the impeccable timing of the consummate political operator - not.
Field urges us to draw from the "lessons" of history, in which natural heirs apparent who take over have ended up making a botch of things (Chamberlain, Eden) while unexpected dark horses who overtook the favourite have gone on to electoral success (Baldwin, Major.)
I would simply urge Field to look at three more recent and pertitent examples of where a decision to pass over the natural successor has badly backfired on the party concerned: Foot over Healey in 1980, Hague over Clarke in 1997, IDS over Portillo and Clarke in 2001.
The sad truth about Frank Field is that he is an embittered man who blames Brown for the failure of his welfare reform green paper in 1998 when he was challenged to "think the unthinkable," and for his subsequent sacking from the Government.
I hate to speak ill of a fellow Christian, but this article ought to ensure that the process of estrangement from the Labour Party, which has been going on ever since that abrupt dismissal, is now complete.
Writing in today's Guardian, Field argues that it is time for Labour to skip a generation to David Miliband, arguing that Gordon Brown's position as leader-in-waiting arises merely from a misguided sense of indebtedness to him for not splitting the party last time round rather than any assessment of his ability.
As that astute observer David Herdson has pointed out on Political Betting, Field's article comes over more as a justification for not electing Brown than an argument for electing the Boy David.
Coming in the wake of last Thursday's astonishing gaffe on Question Time last Thursday - which will be used mercilessly against Gordon by the Tories - it also displays the impeccable timing of the consummate political operator - not.
Field urges us to draw from the "lessons" of history, in which natural heirs apparent who take over have ended up making a botch of things (Chamberlain, Eden) while unexpected dark horses who overtook the favourite have gone on to electoral success (Baldwin, Major.)
I would simply urge Field to look at three more recent and pertitent examples of where a decision to pass over the natural successor has badly backfired on the party concerned: Foot over Healey in 1980, Hague over Clarke in 1997, IDS over Portillo and Clarke in 2001.
The sad truth about Frank Field is that he is an embittered man who blames Brown for the failure of his welfare reform green paper in 1998 when he was challenged to "think the unthinkable," and for his subsequent sacking from the Government.
I hate to speak ill of a fellow Christian, but this article ought to ensure that the process of estrangement from the Labour Party, which has been going on ever since that abrupt dismissal, is now complete.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Blog Wars and Think Tanks
I have said little on the so-called Blog Wars between Tim and Guido since my original post on the matter last month in which I predicted, correctly as it has turned out, that the debate would eventually polarise on political lines. Iain Dale has today called for an end to it, but that seems a forlorn hope at present.
As I said at the outset, I'm sitting on the fence on this one, and none of what follows should be construed as taking sides, but I have thought for some time that there is one aspect of this "war" that is deeply misguided, and about which I ought to speak out. This is the apparent attempt to smear Gordon Brown over his links with the Smith Institute, and the resulting revenge attacks on certain Tory bloggers over their links with the Policy Exchange.
The Smith Institute was set up in memory of the late John Smith. Believe it or not, Gordon Brown was very close to John Smith as a politician and still holds very similar ideas to him on a range of issues. Is it therefore a very great surprise that Brown and the Smith Institute have a close relationship? No, any more than it is a surprise that a would-be Conservative MP such as Iain Dale or a would-be Tory Mayor of London such as Nick Boles should be a trustees of a right-wing think tank, the Policy Exchange.
My point is that political think-tanks are a part of the political process, and have been at least since the days of Harold Wilson and Ted Heath. Some of these think-tanks are close to individual politicians. As I said about David Cameron's schoolboy toking earlier today, big fucking deal.
Feb 14 update: That's enough blog wars - Ed. Comments on this thread will remain open, but the main debate is continuing elsewhere and I think I've said what I have to say on the matter for the time being.
I do have some sympathy with Tim Ireland's view that the blogosphere is a community in which people owe eachother some sort of obligation of good behaviour - as a socialist I would make the same argument about society generally - but I also accept that individual bloggers like Guido have a perfect right to run their blogs in the way they choose, and that there is no sense trying to enforce a "code of etiquette" without more widespread consent for that. End of communication.
As I said at the outset, I'm sitting on the fence on this one, and none of what follows should be construed as taking sides, but I have thought for some time that there is one aspect of this "war" that is deeply misguided, and about which I ought to speak out. This is the apparent attempt to smear Gordon Brown over his links with the Smith Institute, and the resulting revenge attacks on certain Tory bloggers over their links with the Policy Exchange.
The Smith Institute was set up in memory of the late John Smith. Believe it or not, Gordon Brown was very close to John Smith as a politician and still holds very similar ideas to him on a range of issues. Is it therefore a very great surprise that Brown and the Smith Institute have a close relationship? No, any more than it is a surprise that a would-be Conservative MP such as Iain Dale or a would-be Tory Mayor of London such as Nick Boles should be a trustees of a right-wing think tank, the Policy Exchange.
My point is that political think-tanks are a part of the political process, and have been at least since the days of Harold Wilson and Ted Heath. Some of these think-tanks are close to individual politicians. As I said about David Cameron's schoolboy toking earlier today, big fucking deal.
Feb 14 update: That's enough blog wars - Ed. Comments on this thread will remain open, but the main debate is continuing elsewhere and I think I've said what I have to say on the matter for the time being.
I do have some sympathy with Tim Ireland's view that the blogosphere is a community in which people owe eachother some sort of obligation of good behaviour - as a socialist I would make the same argument about society generally - but I also accept that individual bloggers like Guido have a perfect right to run their blogs in the way they choose, and that there is no sense trying to enforce a "code of etiquette" without more widespread consent for that. End of communication.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)