I'm just back from Scotland, campaigning for Elaine Smith MSP. Elaine is a principled socialist who has worked tremendously hard in the Scottish Parliament and in her area. She was born and bred in her constituency of Coatbridge and it was strikingly obvious from talking to local people at the meetings I attended and when we were leafletting from a streetstall in the town centre how well she was known and respected for her hard work in her constituency.
Elaine is in the finest tradition of Labour representatives. Someone who is steeped in the community she represents and who clearly loves the area and its people. The New Labour practice of parachuting favourite apparatchiks into safe seats has undermined this once proud tradition of our party and has contributed to alienating our support.
I am sure that Elaine will do well in her election and if there is any vacancy for a Scottish first minister or any senior ministerial post in the future the party would do well to consider supporting Elaiine for this post. She would serve Scotland and our party with talent, sound judgement and commitment.
As we were campaigning I picked up the article in the Guardian reporting that because I was close to securing sufficient nominations to stand for Labour Leader the Brown camp were worried and, to quote, " were intent on stopping a challenge from the party's left wing, most likely from John McDonnell." According to this article from two of the most reliable and respected political journalists in the country, David Hencke and Tania Branigan, Brown and his campaign managers are determined to stop me getting on the ballot paper even to the extent of trying to pressurise some of my supporters to switch allegiances.
Creating this atmosphere of intimidation and this unhealthy climate of bribes and threats is just unseemly and demeaning for those who are involved or who have sanctioned this behaviour. Why can't MPs be left to make up their own minds in an atmosphere free from bullying threats about the implications for their future careers? Why can't they be left to make a judgement on whom to nominate based upon what they believe is best for the party and the country? Many MPs just want to nominate to allow all party members and trade union affiliated members the chance of a vote and say in this leadership election.
Yet again my message to all of those New Labour factions around Blair and Brown is to lighten up and let democracy work. Let's have an open and friendly debate and a democtratic election. An election with a smile on its face. A bit of maturity and dignity wouldn't go amiss.
27 Comments:
I completely agree, John. I thought that the Blair/Brown capacity to surprise me had long since passed, but...no. What on earth is he and Jack Straw thinking of? I would have thought large numbers of his own supporters will be rightly angered by this affront to the party outside parliament.
I just heard another Radio 4 discussion on the leadership issue on Westminster Hour that they managed to have without mentioning John at all (have already complained to BBC via World at One programme of their sometimes inaccurate coverage of the issue) and wasn't a bit surprised (unfortunately) as this seems to be normal for R4 now.
They did say however that any MP who dosen't nominate Brown will be signing their own political death warrant in that they won't ever be promoted. The Labour representative in the discussion Kitty Usher tried a bit to deny this by waffling on about democracy but wasn't very convincing so it really does come down to this level I reckon as John has blogged. Of course whoever wins is going to choose a team they think they can work with but the "put up or shut up" approach Brown is following here is obviously going to backfire against him as bullies never win in the long run!
John is truly Labour's last chance as Ken Loach said and Francis Prideaux's letter in yesterday's Morning Star reminds us that we have yet to hear from most of the Labour affiliated unions especially the "Big" four who musn't keep holding out for a change of heart from Brown as it just ain't gonna happen!
On the positive side Segoline Royal who is at least supposed to be a socialist has done ok - maybe the BBC will now allow themselves to consider the word let alone the idea of socialism as applied to contemporary politcs and this election and also who is really to know how many nominations anyone especially Brown and Meacher actually have; they could be all jsut assuming or even worse (or better!) bluffing!!
As John says though no-one should be penalised for nominating anyone just because they want to have a democratic election. I know sometimes people fight dirty in politics but just reading abouit the bullying threats makes me feel sick to the stomach just as I used to feel as a civil servant when our manangement would hold back inter-departmental teams and job ads till past their expiry dates so no-one could apply or if you did find a valid team or job to apply for you would get nowhere if your immediate boss said you "weren't ready" or simply dislike you so we were all forced to stay in the same department while our careers stagnated or leave altogether to start over somewhere else (which many of us realised we'd prefer anyway haivng other career interests as well and being treated like that was the catalyst that speeded it up but on the other hand many would have stayed in the service had they been treated properly). It sound as if the Blair/Brownite grip on it's loyalist MPs means they are behaving in the same way which is at odd with real Labour values and interestingly Westminster hour referred to the fact that the Tories had "suppressed" other candidates reaching the election stage while electing their last few leaders as well.
There should be no room for such behaviour within the LABOUR party someone tell Jack Straw or whoever's running Brown's campaign! The programme then went on to reming us how Brown loves to holiday in Cape Cod and soak up the American way of doing things including politics but he must be missing the positive side of America's nature ie. to believe anyine can do anything as if he truly believed in himself he would behave honestly and not try to block other candidates instead of just trying to impress us with his American connections! Also someone should tell him that the actual election will be fought here - he can't Macdonaldise everything..lost my thread now never mind
What is this about Meacher getting conservative nominations? Is it a wind up as surely they would immediately be ruled out of order?!
Perhaps I was seeing things as it's been a long week!!
N.B. nothing to stop ordinary members writing to our union leaders ourselved to ask them to back John if it is the will of their members which it should eb as John supports teh polices which they are campaigning on _Hillary Benn was in trouble at UNISON health conf today wasn't he; difficult position he's in although I don't agree with him sipporting New Labour's decisons on health but it reminds me that John's supporters should by now gather round one deputy leadership candidate but who?? ( as no socialist canddidate now standing??!!)
There is also the alternative, less flattering, report (in yesterday's Observer I think) that Brown is getting some of his nominees to lend support to JM so Brown's elected via a contest & not a coronation.
H,
I am more than tired - in fact I am outrightly disgusted - by those on the Left who attempt to portray Segolene Royal as any better than Tony Blair. She claimed that the man was - and I quote - her "role model". Even members of the PS-right shook their heads in shame and disbelief upon hearing their Queen in waiting making such claims.
Please, wake up! Segolene is about to cost the PS the election...
One more thing - please don't tell that your belief in Segolene's "socialism" springs from the fact that she's a woman... after all, so was Thatcher!
"more than tired of" was of course what I meant!
Having said that, I a forgot to say that Segolene - far from being a Socialist - is no more than a self-obsessed Socialite who uses her mentally deficient (and I use the term loosely) son to run her (socially deficient) campaign...
if SR is a socialist only in name you are quite right Mikhael she can keep it! I hadn't had a chance recently to hear much coverage of her actual politics as soem of our cable news channels have gone due to a fight between Virgin or Sky or something we used ot have NTL anyway, no idea what we have now though I know it's not Sky though husband did succumb to getting Sky sports for a month for the cricket anyway as long as it has BBC Parliament and some news on it then I'm happy and UK Gold of course....!Anyway it has to be cable so I can catch up late at night of necessary when everyone's asleep!): being a TBlair fan is a bit worrying to say the least! Does she not realise how unpopular he is then?? (She should change to admiring another TB - Tony Benn!!)
I did hear that her campaign had had a few problemns but I thought they were political. What are you saying about her son?? Is it wise to label him as "mentally deficient"??
if Brown is so confident that he wants an election as Cheryl I think rightly says and is garnering people to put this in place by nominating him then he should have no problem accepting John's invitation to debate with him then should he??!
I'd ask him again John! (Kevin Maguire said at conference that he'll just refuse it and he hasn't taken up John's challenge so far as far as I know but what does this say about him!!!) How he can be so arrogant as to think the Labour party will just accept his succession without him articulating his policies is beyond me! We should have the chance to pin him down rather than him becoming PM and then calling an early election to legitimise himself and then losing it....what a nightmare!!
Better go and try to find some coverage on Segoline's politics. I suppose I could look her up on the internet but presume we should boycott Google (as well as Sky) as they are censoring the internet in China. Will try yahoo.
I really do have to disagree with the negative comments made about Madame Royal.
Royal is the only candidate suitable to lead France, and certainly the only decent left-winger. France does not want a radical revolutionary Communist in the guise of Besancenot and Bové, they want mainstream politics that preserve the best of their social model.
Like the British, the French have no interest in radical, far-left, extreme, quasi-communism that merely scares the moderates and radicalises the right-wing Sarkzoy vote.
Think there might be some lessons for John and his campaign.
Eh?
I'm backing Sego all the way like most McDonnell supporters, but I don't understand that comment. John's programme is pretty moderate considering (I mean, most of it is Labour party/TUC policy). Since when is it "quasi-communism"?
Obviously there's a few ultra-lefts backing the campaign but they're a tiny vocal minority who always back the most leftwing candidate because they think it'll provide an opening. The SWP did the same with Labour in 1997 - "vote Labour without illusions" - but don't think Blair could be accused of "quasi-communism"!
Jonathan,
The level of your ignorance is alarming!
Your accusations about me supporting Besancenot por Bove are ridiculous. In fact, I know the former personally and think he is a pretty unpleasant character. The latter shouldn't even have made a bid to stand, as far as I'm concerned.
Madame Royal, as you call her, is not a Left-winger - she represents the most right-wing elements within the PS (she faced a contest from a part of the PS-left, which was unfortunately split by the manoeuvres of Arnaud Montebourg). She has run a very narrow, nationalistic campaign.
She has refered to Blair as her "inspiration" (here's a link, I don't expect you to trust the Torygraph, but there you go) :
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/21/wfrance121.xml
Now, as far as quasi-communism is concerned , that's pathetic.... In fact, the French Communist Party used to bve far larger than the PS, which never exceeded 10% in any presidential election until Francois Mitterand (a former Vichy supporter)stood in 1981. It was only at the point at which the PCF began to shift toward the right that its electoral basis began to decline. The PCF still has 130 000 members as opposed to the 120 000 of the PS.
Please don't start harbouring in Royal - I've worked with the PS and I know very well how she and her supporeters behave... I mean, she went as far as reprimanding a young comrade for criticising an element of her programme last year at a meeting in Brittany.... ridiculous....
H,
Maybe I should have put it "intellectually deficient" instead... :-)
I really do think that Mikael needs to realise the political reality within France in 2007.
Before Sunday Royal was the only left-winger suitable for the Presidency, and now Royal is the only suitable candidate for the Presidency. The French left need to unite around her campaign.
Royal has attempted to run a disciplined, organised and well thought out campaign. The French have no interest in electing extreme fringe candidates. Royal has proposed a modern, progressive form of socialism for 21st century France.
John is by and large doing the same, but needs to do more. I support John's campaign wholeheartdly, but feel he needs to start talking more about the mainstream issues. Sadly, this does mean courting the press, finding popular messages that connect with those outside the Labour Party etc...
Lets hear policy on health, education, crime, housing, the economy, cost of living and how John wants to pay for his ideas. If John does this, then he'll have no problem getting those nominations.
"I really do think that Mikael needs to realise the political reality within France in 2007."
Ridiculous, I have worked with the French Left for years - articles which I have authored have enjoyed wide circulation both within the French PS-Left and the Labour-Left of other nations.
Have you done so, oh wise French politics guru????
To be honest, "needs to realise the political reality within France in 2007..." sounds disturbingly familiar to claims made by Blairites concerning the Lab. Left back in '97 as well as today... pathetic, really...
"Before Sunday Royal was the only left-winger suitable for the Presidency..."
Yes and no... The fact that Royal, representing the PS, is the only credible Left-wing challenger is true. That she as such is only candidate suitable for the presidency is quite another story. She can't speak, isn't appealing and doesn't take into consideration of her party comrades.
"...and now Royal is the only suitable candidate for the Presidency. The French left need to unite around her campaign."
I agree and I have raised the issue before. In fact I did so yesterday in a private discussion concerning the second round of the French Presidential elections.
"Royal has proposed a modern, progressive form of socialism for 21st century France."
When, where??? Oh, please do inform me.... Really, you seem to know a lot about French Politics - have you even read Royal's programme. It contains no indications, let alone vague suggestions, of the sort...
"Lets hear policy on health, education, crime, housing, the economy, cost of living"
Again, all of the questions/problems that you mention here have occupied only a very secondary position in Royal's campaign, which has been narrow, exclusive and chauvinistic...
Comparing Royal to John is ridiculous, pathetic, and, quite frankly, an insult to him...
P.S. At the risk of making this too personal, let me tell you that Royal's lousy campaign and swing to the right have managed to bring my French aunt, a die-hard P.S. supporter and voter, to choose abstention over voting for her own Party. She only admitted to me yesterday that, in disgust, she would vote for Royal in the second round - but only out of fear of seeing sarkozy winning the election.
I fear, however, that such an incompetent candidate as Royal has already secured Sarkozy victory.
"Sarkozy's victoy"... sorry about the Typo..
i think jonathan is right! i have just returned from a year studying in paris and sego is certainly better then any of the other left candidates.
enjoying 'wide circulation' is no excuse for arrogance
Well, well, well...
She is undoubtedly better than all of the "far-Left" candidates. This does not mean that she is any better than all the other P.S. candidates which could have stood in her place. I'm thinking of Fabius in particular - though I do not harbour any illusions in him either.
I would, however, not consider the French CP to be part of the "far-Left", nor do I think that its candidate was that bad altogether. This doesn't mean that I found her programme much more attractive than that of Royal. Simply, when faced with a poor candidate like Royal, any other more or less credible Left-wing candidate feels welcome. As you may know, the P.S. does not enjoy the same hegemonic position in France as the Labour Party does in Britain.
I'm sorry if I came off as arrogant. Having said I found it arrogant on Jonathan's part to claim that I was unaware of the political reality of the modern-day French society - in fact, I found his remark most arrogant.
As opposed to your little year in Paris, I lived there for 6 years nad have spent much time working with the French Labour movement. I even played a small role in the anti-CPE demonstrations of last year - though I no longer live in France - after having been invited by members of the Paris CP.
John McDonnell is such a moron he is campaigning for Sue Lent in Wales, a complete careerist despised by the left in Cardiff and particularly hated by left wing young people - if she's the faec of the Labour left, god help us!
I just don't agree with your analysis Mikael.
Hmmm... Have you read her programme though????
I mean, some French socialists may think Blair is great simply due to the fact that they don't know what he stands for and therefore fail to see anything beyond his (new) Labour label...
1) Her campaign has been nationalistic, there's no way you can deny that once you take a look at her campaign posters.
2) she has never even so much as mentioned Socialism - except of course for the few times that she has mentioned the name of her party, from which she has enormously distanced herself. Having said that, she's done a great job mentioning Blair!
3) She has appeal to authoritarian swentiments by claiming that juvenile deliquents ought to be sent to military "boot camps" - in fact, I think she went as far as suggesting to allow "military raids" in schools located in troubled areas.
4) She has (unsuccessfully) attempted to appeal to the female members of the electorate at the detriment of working-class policies.
So, now I've presented a (small and limited) number of facts to support my claims - what evidence can you produce in order to strengthen your positions and prove me wrong. Frankly, I doubt you have any at all!
I'm just happy that I don't have to vote in Fance.
"Creating this atmosphere of intimidation and this unhealthy climate of bribes and threats is just unseemly and demeaning"
Guess you wan't approve of Labour's Scottish campaign, then?
I'm divided here - between getting behind this campaign or not.
I really believe that John Mcdonnell has his heart set on the right ideas, and after watching quite a few clips of speeches etc i'd be more than willing to vote for him; however,it's actually joining the Labour Party that i can't bring myself to do. The Parliamentary Labour Party has been totally ineffective in bringing more equality, justice and liberty and has had periods in power (including the last ten years!!) to bring about large, positive changes that would benefit the MAJORITY of the population rather than the fewer wealthy.
I believe it's down to the fact that the actual mechanics of government do not change - that is whenever socialist ideas are implemented, or attempted, they're attacked by wealthy buisnessmen or large multi-national companies etc and they never quite succeed because of being in the structure as it now stands. Hence why every elected government plays by the rules and is at the whim of the wealthy who will always reject ideas that will have an affect on their % profit.
And this is where my issue lies; that every government that is elected and works under the prevalent system will not produce the changes needed because they are little more than administrators of money... the tax they can squeeze of of people.... and as we all know the people who can least afford it are always hardest hit on balance.
That's why i'm struggling to decide as i can't see ANY government actually changing the processes enough so the right changes can be made.... rather than being slaves to big buisness!
I have voted Labour before but i can't see any political party at present that actually represents, to some extent my views, and has the nerve to actually fundamentally change how it all works. Actually my mum has voted Labor all her life (under the auspice of they'd actually help people who aren't rich) and last weekend i was talking to her when i gave her a lift from the pub about all this - she was slightly well erm 'merry' but she stated that she'd never vote Labour again... ever and was very specific about it.
I believe it's because of all the promises that they haven't delivered on.... a total sham! and this will be quite a few others opinion too i'd imagine!
Sorry for my long post!! :)
Jon
Just going back to Royal, I happened to be in Paris for a few days just before the first round voting and caught TV spots by most of the candidates as the campaigning closed. I was very struck by the Blairite/ New Realist tone of what she said, and indeed she specifically set out her priority list as 'Education, education, education'. Some of the language in France is a bit different, in my view because of the republican history that informs political culture, but programmatically where she was going was pretty clear, and Jonathan is guilty of wishful thinking or misrepresentation in claiming otherwise. It was clear in the course of the election, despite rather narrow coverage in the UK, that Royal did alienate some of the core vote even while reaching into the centre ground.
I don't know Besancenot but I did, by chance, catch one of his speeches, and my wife, less parti pris, commented on what an excellent communicator he was even though we both struggled to understand him. Plainly he had much wider reach than the PCF candidate Buffet or Bove, so I don't really understand Mikael's comments about him or them.
Where this has something in common with John's post which kicked this off is the difficulty of left candidates whether within or outside the LP getting a proper airing in the 'mainstream' media or even an opportunity to stand unless they adopt 'mainstream' policies - i.e. more or less neo-liberal policies with a smaller or larger social democratic twist. Many of our (the left's) most likely constituents are becoming entirely disengaged because this politics offers them nothing and our alternatives (be it John or the Socialist Alliance/Respect) lack any credibility. Turnout in many places is appalling (NB Jonathan - I recently voted on the Canterbury campus and turnout in the ward was 18%!) and many people have lost the habit of being on the register. In fact there is a mountain to climb and this campaign is unlikely to do more than be a start in the right direction. However "courting the press [and] finding popular messages that connect with those outside the Labour Party" through that press is tantamount to abandoning those channels.
As the attempt to shut John out of this contest shows, we need to rebuild the base or we are dependent on the favours or otherwise of labour movement bureaucrats, which is no way to go.
Photoshop CS4
Windows XP
cheap jordan shoes
Microsoft Office
Metallic UGG Boots
Mini UGG Boots
I agree with you, your saying is so good and usful for me. Thanks. Are you also like
ugg boots sale
ugg australia
uggs
It’s a meaningful and interesting topic. Thanks.
Some butterfly knot in the above Fendi bag, many people should agree that it is one of most romantic fendi spy bag. Then under slightly arranges gives you to demonstrate that several model of butterfly knot replica chloe paddington bags, let your romantic feeling and the Chloe Padlock collection bags promote together! In these two model of Chanel Replica handbags,, the designer handbag and the coat of paint completely obviously romantically are real with the child, Chanel Wallets replica belong to female student's attire tender magic weapon, recommends for each mm butterfly knot replica handbags, regardless of being goes to work, shopping, the appointment is very suitable
designer handbags
Buy Kamagra
Earn Google
M65 Jacket
Viagra Cialis
Cheap Kamagra
Cheap Viagra
Cheap Cialis
Make Money on Google
M65 Field Jacket
Airline Dog Carrier
Airline Dog Carriers
Viagra Cialis
Earn Google
Airline Dog Carrier
Airline Dog Carriers
Airline Approved Dog Carriers
ED Hardy Wholesale
Copy DVD Software
How to Send Fax
14k Yellow Gold
Redneck Costume
14k Gold Heart
Tandem Baby Stroller
More and more people began to collect jordan shoes. If you are Michael Jordan fans, you must have collection air jordans . If you want to buy the cheap jordan shoes,you can search the internet.Jordan is the hero of every individual mind. Of course, we are also very like the air jordan shoes .So you will like the air jordans,you will found the shoes make you become more and more beautiful.
Post a Comment
<< Home