Tory 13 Point Poll Lead
Wake up tomorrow to a Guardian poll which gives the Tories a 13 point lead over Labour when people were specifically asked about their voting intention if Gordon Brown were leader and a 9 point lead if asked the usual question of which party they were voting for. This would provide the Tories with a Parliamentary majority of up to 50 seats.
The poll explodes any myth that a smooth transition from Blair to Brown will result in an uplift for Labour. The loss of support associated with Brown as leader is statistically close to the range of sampling error but still provides no comfort for the Brown camp.
As we keep saying, the reality is that it is not personalities but the New Labour policies which are losing us support. Simply changing the face at the top without a fundamental change of the policies is irrelevant.
A poll last week confirmed that it is our core supporters who are deserting us most.
We are disillusioning the very people who put us into power.
With this polling news it is even more imperative that Labour MPs allow a leadership contest to take place by supporting our nomination campaign. This will permit a debate over policies to be staged and enable our members in both the party and unions to have a say over the future of our government and country.
The poll explodes any myth that a smooth transition from Blair to Brown will result in an uplift for Labour. The loss of support associated with Brown as leader is statistically close to the range of sampling error but still provides no comfort for the Brown camp.
As we keep saying, the reality is that it is not personalities but the New Labour policies which are losing us support. Simply changing the face at the top without a fundamental change of the policies is irrelevant.
A poll last week confirmed that it is our core supporters who are deserting us most.
We are disillusioning the very people who put us into power.
With this polling news it is even more imperative that Labour MPs allow a leadership contest to take place by supporting our nomination campaign. This will permit a debate over policies to be staged and enable our members in both the party and unions to have a say over the future of our government and country.
posted by John at 10:29 PM
29 Comments:
Just heard this, its incredible,
Ruth Kelly is is to scrap secure Council Tenancies and means test 3 million Council Tenants to see if they are poor enough to qualify for housing. this really is the last straw, nu labour must go, people must support John.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/tm_headline=3-million-council-tenants-face-boot-&method=full&objectid=18642059&siteid=89520-name_page.html
Unbelievable! Even for New Labour.No wonder we're in such a mess.Yes, we must redouble our efforts.I hope defend Council Housing will do their utmost to stop this apppalling policy.
Sorry, what's the new policy? To check that people in council housing are poor enough to deserve it? What's wrong with that? If someone has enough money to move out of council housing they should do so - there isn't enough council housing as it is, without it being filled up with people who don't belong there.
Or am I completely missing something? I'm surprised they don't check already?
McDonnell, you are a despicable little weasel. You are not going to win. Understand?
OK, let's spell it out. People who "aren't poor enough" (whatever that means) will be shunted off to the private sector where they will be ripped off mercilessly. Means-tested Council houses will no longer be homes for families but temporary holding stations .On parents' deaths, children will be evicted.If that policy goes ahead, instant recipe for more sink estates, social deprivation, crime and anger. Oh yes, and more votes for the BNP .The Labour Party used to build homes for working people.Councils now can't do that because of local authority legislation and the Govt's obsession with ALMOs and housing associations. This despite the fact more council housing is Labour Party policy and has been passed at Conference several times.It's time we put the council back into council housing.Not even Thatcher would have proposed this disgraceful, draconian policy, which has been described by Shelter as "terrifying." Got it now?
I'm not sure that I have. I don't know what "not poor enough" is. That sounds like a bone of contention. But in theory, why should the government provide housing for people who don't need it provided?
On the other hand, if you can afford to have your own housing and so on, I don't know why you'd carry on sitting in council housing so I'm dubious that this is an issue worth pursuing...but again, I don't know. It just sounds like a logical policy on paper.
Why would it mean children get kicked out if their parents die? I presume we're talking about adult children - nevertheless, why?
Ripped off by the private sector - what's "ripped off"? Housing is a scarce resource - so you have to pay a lot for it. Well, the bubble will have to burst soon anyway.
As for housebuilding, I'm in favour of government housebuilding and all sorts of planned building schemes etc; trying to "build crime out" of areas, or just provide enough housing for people full stop...
But as I said, meantime, there is a scarcity of council housing, lots of people are waiting for council housing I thought, surely it's best what there is goes to whoever needs it most? That's my understanding of the object of the policy.
I am seriously beginning to think that everyone in the cabinet has a vested interest in seeing house prices rise. Their complete misunderstanding of the need for social housing is shocking!
Anonymous wrote "McDonnell, you are a despicable little weasel. You are not going to win. Understand?"
Oh well that's the leadership election over then ? - aye right -good joke anon.
Brown has nothing to offer - he doesn't believe in the same policies as the party members , he doesn't offer anything except more PFI meaning more cuts to the unions and now he can't even say he would boost the party's chances of winning another election.
He has no-one to blame but himself for putting his ambition before everything - he followed every one of Blair's policies while pretending to secretly oppose them.
John McDonnell has more support in the Labour party , in the unions and outside the party among former voters and members who would return under his leadership.
If the press had any acumen they'd be writing off Brown's chances and focusing on McDonnell as the most likely Labour leader - and Prime Minister.
The amount of interest generated by the grassroots in this campaign is so impressive.
Following a recent visit to Preston by John, Labour Party members came out of the woodwork I didn't know existed!!
Remember, the Labour Party membership have not voted for a leader for 13 years. The recent NEC election results plus numerous leadership defeats at party conference show how the policies promoted in this campaign are firmly in the mainstream of the Labour movement.
A situation is arising where many CLP's are not sending delegates to conference now because they feel the views of there members will be ignored.
These feelings of frustration will benefit John during the leadership election. There are lots of angry party members and trade unionists who will make there feelings known during the contest.
Who says he can't do it??
Quite so. Brown is a busted flush for reasons stated above.
On housing: other parts of Europe and US have housing for rent as a matter of course. Why is UK different? Council housing was not originally for the poorest of the poor but for what Blairitee now patronisngly refer to as "hard working familes" ie the working-class. That included skilled workers.
Yes,the world has changed.But that also means there are millions of single-income households where social housing is a necessity. How is someone earning even a very respectable £30,000 a year going to get on the property ladder in London. ?Maybe they ned somewhere cheap to LIVE first? Why should they have to pay extortionate rents from provate landlords? Others on low wages will probably never get the chance to own their own homes - they deserve decent social housing.Not refugee camps. The latest proposals also include plans to disallow "homes for life" so when elderly parents died, the rest of the family would be forced to leave.
I agree with Cllr Brown. This campaign is rebuilding the Labour party from the bottom up. In my area, people who ripped up their party cards years ago are coming back. And people are actually EXCITED about being in the Labour party for the first time in as long as I can remember!
J4L!
How would the Scum react if McDonnell won though?
"Far left veteran socialist John McDonnell was shockingly voted in as leader of the Labour party, defeating proven heavyweight, the succesful Chancellor Gordon Brown. McDonnell's triumph promises a return to the dark days of the 1970's, when figures such as Tony Benn, who has spoken on the platform with McDonnell, dominated the Labour party." etc etc etc.
Housing: Most people like to own their own homes; though a lot of economists now predict this will become steadily less and less common. Well, I'd like my own house.
But on this policy, the issue remains that there is currently a limited stock of social housing and, I believe, a longish waiting list for said housing. Advocate building more such housing by all means, but meantime, should it not go to people who need it most?
When will you guys get it - John is not taken seriously by enough people, in fact, one gets the impression that he doesn't even take himself seriously. Every mainstream newspaper article I have read that mentions the new leadership fails to mention him. Do you honestly think a few grassroots members will sway enough MPs into voting for him - no chance. John's excuse for this lack of mainstream coverage is that he won't court the media circuit, well mate, you're standing for leader of the Labour party & you need to play by the rules to some extent - you can't have it both ways, you need to work the system & you're patently not. I am really so angry that someone more worthwhile isn't around to make a proper go of this, especially someone who could capitalise on the mainstream anti-war sentiment which is now withering. The whole McDonnell campaign comes across as lacking any organisation or nous & as a serious shambles. What a waste.
Anonymous is beginning to sound like Ali Campbell ? or is that Ed Balls?
npm - I don't think either of those people would think it a waste that a left campaign for leader within the Labour party is desparately failing.
The fact that people now are resorting to cowardly tactics like these only proves that this campaign has them worried.
John I support your campaign totally, but why are you not on Newsnight? Question Time? The Guardian? Today? etc
The public need to see who you are!
Yes, the public need to see what a slimy little cretin you really are!
These anonymous posters really are despicable.They could at least own up to who they are. They also happen to be utterly wrong. The John4Leader campaign is NOT "a few grassroots members." At the very least, it's tens of thousands of Labour members and trade unionists. Yes, there's little mention in the mainstream media. When was there ever fair coverage of the left?
Before Blair,and his pandering to the Murdochs, we always took a hammering.
But , yes, we need to do something to counteract this lack of coverage. Priority 1 is that John should be given a slot on Question Time, where he would have a national platform and millions of viewers.So let's get writing /e-mailing the production team. If you have an event in your area, ring the local paper and/or radio station. Send out a press release with the details of meetings.....it may not work but is worth a try. The easiest coverage of all is letters to local papers.Download pictures of meetings and send them to the press. If your Mp is endorsing John, then make sure that's also in the public domain. We have to keep trying !
Will the real anonymous stand-up :-)
All you need to do is click on "other" and then type in an ident in the name box - at least we can respond to an individual post then.
The various 'anonymous' posters is in fact the same person - Sham. I suggest we ignore him.
thought i recognised the eloquent debate!
Actually I've seen John interviewed on Newsnight (though only once and not for long enough) and he's been quoted and referred to in the Guardian dozens of times.
e.g http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,2017757,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2018014,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2003013,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1992397,00.html
I agree his campaign deserves more coverage in the rest of the media to reflect the wide support he has inside and outside the party.
The anonymous who posted first isn't the guy who appears later, surely?
susan - on housing, Menzies Campbell said in PMQs today that there are 1.6m people waiting for social housing. Apart from supporting the cause for more building to be done, surely that supports the case that the government can't keep people in social housing who can afford to move out in theory?
It's an horrific problem, isn't it? My guess is that people who can "afford" to move out ie buy their own homes probably do so already.In past years many of course bought their council homes but the stock is so depleted that's not so much of an option.In my view, it should not have been anyway but what's done is done.We're now seeing the consequences.
Since Labour came to power,house prices have gone up so much that first-time buyers have to be earning a colossal amount to get onto the ladder.My own house has quintupled in price since 1996. It's a modest terraced property. I could not afford it now.
We have a deficit of homes, agrowing number of people who will have no option but to rent. Where do they go? Then there are the people in social need. Allocating social housing only to the very needy is not a solution. Yvette Cooper said, quite rightly , on Newsnight, that we need to have all social classes living together to create better social inter-action andend "sink estate" mentality. The opposite will happen under these proposals, wbich will create ghettos of poverty.Don't claim to be an expert in any way but the Labour Party pioneered decent social housing for ordinary families. It's time we started doing that again and building more homes, instead of selling off land and handing over sites toprivate developers.It would help if the Govt followed\party policy on this ( see the Defend Council Housing campaign)
This idea of mixing different levels of income together seems a strange idea to me. If you're well off, you'll move to somewhere that's a nice area as much as has a nice house. There are nice houses which are just left empty in various ghetto areas around the country, because people well off enough to buy them don't want them. There are lots of reasons for this - crime levels are higher in poorer areas, the aesthetic environment is less attractive, less people of similair backgrounds (and by general extension, interests); and there's often some hostility to you if you're well off and go through poor areas, so that could feel uncomfortable. There's also snob factor in it, and not wanting to have to see binge drinking chavettes sitting on your garden wall in the evening.
So, I simply don't think it'll work well. People of certain backgrounds, ethnic groups, economic classes, etc, just tend to coalesce.
I've said before that more middle-class type housing would enable people to move up the scale, rather than shifting people currently in ghetto areas directly. This has the benefit of allowing as many people as possible to live in nice areas. The problem is that you still have a lack of council owned housing, so you have to do some of both really.
I doubt that the new proposals will have a dramatic effect on this therefore - if you don't have to, you don't live in a council housing type area.
You mention that most people in social housing probably can't afford to move out - I suspect this is true, so this new policy will hardly solve much.
The central answer is quite simple - there isn't enough housing - most everyone agrees on that. I doubt that New Labour's dogmatic preference for the private sector to run everything helps matters; otherwise it's a case of problems with all sorts of government housing plans, and in some cases not enough government housing plans.
I don't know enough about it, but knocking down all those terraced houses in the north seems a very strange idea. Private Eye has reported on strange goings on in Sunderland related to housing, and I'm bluntly sceptical of the potential success of anything worked out under the responsibility of John Prescott. Why he was given charge of such critical areas as transport and housing, at once, will probably bewilder a few historians in years to come.
New Labour Deputy Leadership candidate, Michael Meacher MP, and his wife have a property empire worth £2 million consisting of nine properties…..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,425373,00.html
See also: They Work For You ….
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/michael_meacher/oldham_west_and_royton#register
All this, when millions of people cannot afford one home.
'Comrade' Meacher is just another bourgeois politician.
John Smithee
Cambridgeshire
John ,
Tory with 10 points leads ( 50-100 maority seats) in House of Commons .
Please note that we have been campaigning since Margaret Thatcher .
PLease do help settle our Case with a Public Apology by PM Tony Blair and the security agencies and an Independent Nico Ntumba Inquiry .
The late Bernie Grant was asking for Nico Ntumba Inquiry since early 1990s . Now we are in 2007 .
It is a shame that Tony Blair ignored our plight for Justice.
NicoNtumba_JusticeCampaign
Post a Comment
<< Home