Left-wing challenge for Labour leadership

ComradeDavo

Formerly God
Joined
Jul 1, 2001
Messages
12,243
Location
Europa
No coranation for Gordon Brown! And a step up in pressure on Blair.....but not a direct challenge....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5179556.stm

Labour MP launches leadership bid

John Mcdonnell launches his challenge in Westminster
Left-wing backbencher John McDonnell has said he will run for the Labour leadership when Tony Blair stands down.
The Hayes and Harlington MP said he was not a "stalking horse" candidate trying to topple Tony Blair.

But he wanted to ensure there was no "coronation" for Gordon Brown once Mr Blair leaves Downing Street.

Mr McDonnell said he wanted to repair the damage done by New Labour and represent people "who no longer feel they have a voice".

He promised to tour the country with his campaign and urged lapsed Labour members to rejoin the party to get involved in the debate.

"This is not a move against Tony Blair - it's a move against New Labour and the way it's formed at the moment," he told reporters on Westminster's College Green.

"We've had no debate. We in the party have felt very disenfranchised."

'Smooth transition'

The 54-year-old is chairman of the left-wing Campaign Group has been one of party's most rebellious MPs.

He promised to "get back to grass roots campaigning" and end the spin of New Labour.

He predicted Mr Blair, who says he will leave before the next election, would announce his resignation in the next 12 or 18 months.

"Some have argued that instead of an open democratic election for the leader of the party, there should be a smooth transition or virtual coronation of his successor," said Mr McDonnell.

"This would deny party members the opportunity of openly debating the issues facing our party and the future direction of the party."

He said a handover to Mr Brown could soon be followed by a "smooth transition" to Conservative leader David Cameron.

He accused the government of systematically alienating sections of Labour supporters - students, pensioners, public service workers, trade unionists, green activists and civil liberties and peace campaigners.

"This is reflected in lost votes, lost elections, lost members and a Labour prime minister having to rely upon Conservative votes in Parliament to force through legislation," he argued.

Loyalty?

But Mr McDonnell said he was happy to let Mr Blair stand down at a time of his choosing rather than try to hasten his departure.

"We have a real tradition in the Labour Party of loyalty to the leadership," he said. "We don't assassinate the leadership."

He insisted he was not a "stalking horse" but a "serious challenger" for the Labour leadership.

He denied his announcement would destabilise Labour and said it was not prompted by the recent "cash for peerages" allegations.

He said he had been wanting to announce his candidate for weeks but his plans were foiled every time by a new government controversy.

"We can't keep on delaying," he added.

Mr McDonnell has voted against Labour in the Commons on several occasions.

He has spent 25 years in politics and was the deputy leader of the Greater London Council under Ken Livingstone.

I say good, I don't want Brown as leader, too tainted by New Labour for my liking.
 
This must be the guy that was getting it ripped out of him on Channel 4. Aparantly he lost lots of seats in his constituancy last vote. The danger of Labour heading left at the moment is that the Tories will gain the centre-right voters that Labour currently clings to. This would mean the Lib Dems would have to swing to the middle (IIR they sat there before New Labour came about) or fight Labour head on. This can only be good for the Tories.
 
Gordon Brown supports genocide weapons, wars of aggression and the removal of civil liberties and the rule of law in the name of a vacuous and indefinite "war on terror", so anything that hurts his ascent to power is welcome. I don't know what actual effect this will have however, since Gordon Brown will be the next Prime Minister in any case.
 
Truronian said:
This must be the guy that was getting it ripped out of him on Channel 4. Aparantly he lost lots of seats in his constituancy last vote. The danger of Labour heading left at the moment is that the Tories will gain the centre-right voters that Labour currently clings to. This would mean the Lib Dems would have to swing to the middle (IIR they sat there before New Labour came about) or fight Labour head on. This can only be good for the Tories.
The thing about the Lib Dems is that the party grassroots is left-wing, and as a one member one vote party this means that the grassroots have a say over the party policy.

So it's doubtfull they would 'swing to the middle' as it would annoy their membership.
 
In other words, it's better for the Lib Dems if Labour continues to founder under Brown than if they try to appeal to their original core voters (who are slowly switching to the Lib Dems).
 
Cuivienen said:
In other words, it's better for the Lib Dems if Labour continues to founder under Brown.

Yes. Although its hard to say whats best for keeping the Tories away from power.

Gordon Brown:
People will continue to leave new labour to both the Lib Dems and the Tories. Depending on numbers, any of the three could end up on top (most likely the Tories though, I feel).

New guy:
Labour will shift left, taking left-wing voters from the Lib Dems but losing centre-right voters to the Tories. Tories gain, Lib Dems lose, New new labour could go either way. Of course, the Tories and the Lib Dems could shift similarly, in which case the Tories may lose votes to UKIP. Could go either way in this scenario aswell.
 
Truronian said:
Yes. Although its hard to say whats best for keeping the Tories away from power.

I find it difficult to see the Tories winning enough votes from Labour to win power (a majority) without losing ground behind them to UKIP, the BNP, etc. In any case, Labour needs a bit of time out of power, and a two-year Tory minority is the perfect solution.

Gordon Brown:
People will continue to leave new labour to both the Lib Dems and the Tories. Depending on numbers, any of the three could end up on top (most likely the Tories though, I feel).

Of course the Tories end up on top. But they wouldn't gain significant ground against the Lib Dems, and they will continue to come close to being shut out in the northern cities, Scotland and Wales, preventing them from winning a majority.

This scenario also keeps more center-right and centrist voters away from the Tories than the below scenario. After all, the left-wing Labour voters will never switch to the Tories anyway--maybe to the Lib Dems or the Greens, but not the Tories, so maintaining them is far less of a concern in keeping out a Tory government.

New guy:
Labour will shift left, taking left-wing voters from the Lib Dems but losing centre-right voters to the Tories. Tories gain, Lib Dems lose, New new labour could go either way. Of course, the Tories and the Lib Dems could shift similarly, in which case the Tories may lose votes to UKIP. Could go either way in this scenario aswell.

Labour has relatively little to gain from the Lib Dems (whose vote seems to have hardened at 18%) while the Tories still have miles and miles to gain from Labour. Labour loses considerable overall ground (almost the entire center), the Lib Dems lose some ground and the Tories could potentially return triumphant.
 
Either way, I'm probably gonna end up voting Labour (although I'd prefer to see the new guy in power). Thats assuming all parties have equal chance in my future district.
 
Assuming that you'll still be in Cornwall, I find it doubtful that Labour will have any chance of winning in your district, but we shall see. (The only new constituency in which Labour will have any chance at all in Cornwall will be Camborne and Redruth, the renamed and slightly expanded Falmouth and Camborne, which Labour lost to the Lib Dems in 2005.)
 
I probably won't be in Cornwall (uni) so will have to do some research into the area in which I will live (given that it wil be a student area, Lib Dems may be prevelant).

[cornish politics]
The large Lib Dem presence in Cornwall is down to the skewed population. There are a large number of retirees who traditionally voted for the Tories (fond memories of Churchill and the Tories social conservetism being he swing points). However, more recently the oldies have been changing their vote to the Lib Dem's for their economic liberalism (more generous pensions/ healthcare etc). Camborne and Redruth are effectively Cornwall's council estate. That coupled with the history of mining and lack of tourism in the area explain the Labour presence.
[/cornish politics]

You know a suspicious amount about British Politics for a USian :hmm:
 
I make it my business to as much as possible about the politics of all English-speaking countries. (I would do it for all developed countries, but it's much harder to learn about non-English-speaking countries' politics as few of the resources are in English.) Just something to do, I guess. I also find that I always support a third party (the NDP in Canada, the Lib Dems in the UK, the Democrats and the Greens in Australia, the Progressives in New Zealand).
 
I say good, I don't want Brown as leader, too tainted by New Labour for my liking.[/QUOTE]


I'd 2nd that I used to admire him but his pampering to middle england is sickening thou hopefully that and his stance on nuclear power/weapons will shake the apathy and depression up here in Scotland and start the road to freedom, the nightmare scernario could be a the tories being elected by the English again and them trying to force there policies up here!
 
Cuivienen said:
the Democrats ... in Australia,

Not particularly relevant to this thread, but Meg Lees crippled the democrats fairly effectively a few years ago. They still seem to be struggling.
 
Truronian said:
This must be the guy that was getting it ripped out of him on Channel 4. Aparantly he lost lots of seats in his constituancy last vote. The danger of Labour heading left at the moment is that the Tories will gain the centre-right voters that Labour currently clings to. This would mean the Lib Dems would have to swing to the middle (IIR they sat there before New Labour came about) or fight Labour head on. This can only be good for the Tories.

Good post thou up here at least we have the option of getting rid of both new labour and the fear of ever being ruled by the tories again, pity the World Cup wasn't next year :)
 
bholed said:
I'd 2nd that I used to admire him but his pampering to middle england is sickening thou hopefully that and his stance on nuclear power/weapons will shake the apathy and depression up here in Scotland and start the road to freedom, the nightmare scernario could be a the tories being elected by the English again and them trying to force there policies up here!

The thing is, as I've said before, the Tories can't win a majority just by winning back some votes from Labour because Brown is a bumbler. And a minority Tory government is nothing to fear.
 
Our politics are screwed.

I'm about as left as you can get, but if Brown gets into power, I will seriously consider voting for him.

The Lib Dems lost my vote when they got rid of chuck, and Ming started appealing to the middle class in a ridiculous U-turn on previous policy.
 
Ming is definitely a problem. The Lib Dems have lots of support in the student population; why have they resurrected this guy to lead? I suppose it could help bolster support amongst the pensioners, but they are in danger of losing the voter of tommorow to Labour.
 
nonconformist said:
Our politics are screwed.

I'm about as left as you can get, but if Brown gets into power, I will seriously consider voting for him.

The Lib Dems lost my vote when they got rid of chuck, and Ming started appealing to the middle class in a ridiculous U-turn on previous policy.
I find this baffling.

I'm guessing our politics are roughly similar given that the Lib Dems also lost my support when Ming started reversing key policies. But to react to this by supporting Gordon Brown seems crazy to me. I don't have a clue who I'll end up voting for, but it sure as hell won't be an authoritarian warmonger.
 
I doubt this new left-winger who I know nothing about will really trouble Gordon Brown too much, but if he causes Labour to shift to the Left then I expect the winners will be the Tories. I expect I'm not the only person who'll be voting on a "who do you dislike the least" basis as opposed to a "who do you agree with" basis at the the next election. I'll never vote Labour, Cameron's too busy being nice to everyone to actually have thought through any policies, and the Lib Dems don't seem to be doing or saying anything really. Which leaves me choosing between the Tories and Lib Dems. It'll probably come down to whether I'm at uni or home on the day TBH, I'm anti-Labour more than pro anyone else right now.

bholed said:
the nightmare scernario could be a the tories being elected by the English again and them trying to force there policies up here!

I'd still say it was preferable to having Labour use Scottish MPs to impose laws on the English that will never affect their constituents:rolleyes:

Also I might not agree with the government on much, but as far as I can tell using nuclear power can't be avoided for now.
 
Cuivienen said:
I find it difficult to see the Tories winning enough votes from Labour to win power (a majority) without losing ground behind them to UKIP, the BNP, etc.

Although the BNP are a far-right group, it is not Tory votes that they can win. UKIP can win Euro-sceptic Tory supporters but it is a strange anomaly in British politics that the extreme right party (the BNP) actually seek to win left-wing (primarily Labour) supporters. The majority Tory support comes from rural areas and the middle-classes...two groups that would almost certainly never vote BNP. The BNP votes are in the inner-cities, the heartlands of Labour.

Just an interesting little facet about British politics :).
 
Top Bottom