The Labour Leadership contest is in danger of turning into a complete and utter farce.
The Three Stooges : Clarke, Milburn and Meacher
Ignoring the Byzantine policy-making structure which they helped to foist upon the Labour Party, Charles Clarke and Alan Milburn now propose to set up their own policy debate via a web-site. Yet as every blogger knows, comment boxes seriously degenerate after the first wave of entries - just have a look at Harry's Place.
John McDonnell is probably correct when he states that "nobody can believe that this is anything other than a smokescreen for the launch of a pre-emptive coup against Gordon Brown by the Blairite ultra-right." For when this duo are supposed to be tackling Gordon Brown on policy matters, instead they concentrate on what really worries them - his slump in the opinion polls put down to a lack of charisma.
On the third stooge, see this one I made earlier.
At The Starting Blocks
A. Gordon Brown. He has been the economic wing of New Labour, even though he has had one of the longest sulks about his leader, even challenging that of Ted Heath over Margaret Thatcher. For those in a democratic socialist position, he is a non-starter - unless he is suddenly going to return to the days of John Smith.
B. John McDonnell. He was fine when we shared rebel division lobbies against New Labour excesses. But everything can't be put back in one fell swoop. His campaign isn't meant to build a meaningful challenge to old, new or right-wing Blairism. He is merely for spreading the socialist gospel. But even that aim will backfire in widespead defeat.
C. Micheal Meacher. He has no credabilty on his chosen ground of the centre-left. He tucked in with the New Labour Government and then got the sack. He had missed his chance to resign and build a base amongst the very back-benchers he is now trying to appeal to. When he was finally free to move, he came up with a futile conspiracy theory about 9/11. He had been surfing the net without discernment.
D. Godot or God-damn-it. This is the yet unknown candidate of the dreams of Charles Clarke and Allan Milburn (they are probably waiting for us to turn out on the streets to shout for them.) If what emerges is a substitute for Blair/Brown or the right wing varient feared by John McDonnell, then this could be the candidate from hell.
Who Is Doing The Thinking On The Centre-Left ?
The leftward leaning (but pro-capitalist) think-tank Compass has washed its hands of the Leadership Contest and is running a strange and premature ballot for its members for the Deputy Leadership instead. As the returning officer, it is asking its members to vote for Jon Cruddas. Are they serious ?
As I keep arguing, only Peter Hain (of the booming Northern Ireland economy) can save the centre-left from the folly of a Leadership contest where it currently has no real presence. OK, I am on the left but we can't do anything without a centre. Why do I seem to be the only to be making the case for Peter4Leader? Perhaps I am the only one who isn't mad after ten years of New Labouring.
If Peter does not make a move, then I will probably have to end up voting for John McDonnell (if he makes the ballot paper). But this will be due to a non-emotional spasm and will be an act of desparation. And without John in the contest, it will have to be Gordon or abstention. I can't belieeeve it.
Showing posts with label Michael Meacher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Meacher. Show all posts
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Michael : You Have Placed Us In It.
The Poor Man's Clare Short
Michael Meacher's decision to stand for the leadership of the Labour Party and thus for the Prime Minister's Crown is an unmitigated disaster.
He is yesterday's man, having stood for the deputy leadership 23 years ago in the heyday of a long departed Bennism.
He then tucked in as a Labour Minister under New Labour, voting for the invasion of Iraq. He had failed to budge or to follow Robin Cook - who at one time had only been soft left compared to Michael's hard leftism.
When Clare Short resigned over the invasion of Iraq it was too late, but at least she resigned and had been doing some of the work of a socialist at International Development. Unlike Clare, Michael only found his voice to criticise New Labour once he was pushed out of the Government.
He now seems to have flipped over to a "troops out" position over Iraq. So he voted incorrectly in favour of the invasion and compounds this by calling for a premature scuttle.
Heaven knows, I have disagreed enough with Tony Blair over Iraq but on the troops position he made a sensible speech in the Commons yesterday. I don't know if Michael heard it. But he certainly did not stay in the chamber to ask questions afterwards.
Ego Tripping
What we need is a left-leaning candidate who will offer a sensible critique of New Labourism, whilst being serious about troop withdrawals and will adopt a Labourite platform which won't frighten the birds.
Although Gordon Brown will probably win, what of the situation afterwards? We need someone who will be a focus for an alternative approach which democratic socialists can live with. This won't be Michael. He will once more disappear into the wilderness when his present ego trip is over.
Waiting For Peter
The alternative to Gordon and John McDonnell should be Peter Hain. He has at least made noises in Government to show that he isn't in tune with the general thrust of New Labour.
If Michael has placed the blocks on Peter's leadership candidature, I will never forgive him. Michael's decision to stand makes John now look like the only refuge for Labour Party socialists - unless Peter will at last grasp the nettle.
Michael Meacher's decision to stand for the leadership of the Labour Party and thus for the Prime Minister's Crown is an unmitigated disaster.
He is yesterday's man, having stood for the deputy leadership 23 years ago in the heyday of a long departed Bennism.
He then tucked in as a Labour Minister under New Labour, voting for the invasion of Iraq. He had failed to budge or to follow Robin Cook - who at one time had only been soft left compared to Michael's hard leftism.
When Clare Short resigned over the invasion of Iraq it was too late, but at least she resigned and had been doing some of the work of a socialist at International Development. Unlike Clare, Michael only found his voice to criticise New Labour once he was pushed out of the Government.
He now seems to have flipped over to a "troops out" position over Iraq. So he voted incorrectly in favour of the invasion and compounds this by calling for a premature scuttle.
Heaven knows, I have disagreed enough with Tony Blair over Iraq but on the troops position he made a sensible speech in the Commons yesterday. I don't know if Michael heard it. But he certainly did not stay in the chamber to ask questions afterwards.
Ego Tripping
What we need is a left-leaning candidate who will offer a sensible critique of New Labourism, whilst being serious about troop withdrawals and will adopt a Labourite platform which won't frighten the birds.
Although Gordon Brown will probably win, what of the situation afterwards? We need someone who will be a focus for an alternative approach which democratic socialists can live with. This won't be Michael. He will once more disappear into the wilderness when his present ego trip is over.
Waiting For Peter
The alternative to Gordon and John McDonnell should be Peter Hain. He has at least made noises in Government to show that he isn't in tune with the general thrust of New Labour.
If Michael has placed the blocks on Peter's leadership candidature, I will never forgive him. Michael's decision to stand makes John now look like the only refuge for Labour Party socialists - unless Peter will at last grasp the nettle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)