And Another Thing…

What are the odds on yes vote of 4-1?

Didn’t I already ask this same question in response to your previous post? As it was my idea, I’d like some credit please.

Thank you in advance, and, you’re welcome.

Didn’t I already ask this same question in response to your previous post? As it was my idea, I’d like some credit please.

Thank you in advance, and, you’re welcome.

No, Stephen, you simply asked: “Will this mean that Diane Abbot is sure of a Shadow Cabinet post?”

You assume that, having lost the race for the top job, she would even want to serve in a more junior role, which is not necessarily a

Tom

‘if’ big ‘IF’ offered a post

Not necessarily, Mr Mxyzptik. Anyone elected to the Shadow Cabinet must be offered a portfolio by the leader.

Your ability to take this whole charade seriously does you credit. The fact is that it matters not which of the Eds or David wins because none of them have accepted that the New Labour nonsense has been rejected by the voters they need to persuade if they are to win the next election.

Each is trying to put more distance than their rivals between themselves and old New Labour policies. But they were all there, all equally implicated, all equally unconvincing, all equally unelectable.

David Milliband has said he wants to review private sector pay. The more he harks back to socialist dogma, the more you and your lot will show your true colours.

I laughed at today’s Grauniad piece asking a range of labour thinkers (most of whom I have never heard of) for their ideas for policy. Put the whole lot together and Michael Foot’s longest suicide note in history seems positively upbeat.

The socialists are alive and well in your party which should ensure you remain in opposition for the next ten years at least.

I don’t see why it’s the test of seriousness of each candidate.

If you were ideologically on a completely different wing of the party, you might be very serious about the leadership, but not want to serve under the other candidates.

Or, if there was a particular candidate you know to be completely ill-suited, you might be prepared to serve under most candidates but not one or two. That wouldn’t make you less serious.

I’d actually think the opposite. If all running are prepared the serve on the front bench if they don’t win, then how serious can they be about their own special talents for leadership? If you would be perfectly content to see the party led by *all* the other 4 candidates, what are you doing in the race?

Is that unfair?

Wrong wrong wrong. This subordinance to the leader is what is wrong with contemporary British politics. Parties should be able to have internal debates whilst still providing either effective opposition or effective government. Internal debate doesn’t mean ripping each other apart, it means debating the issues transparently so the electorate know how a view has been formed.

It is all this follow the leader nonsense which turns so many people off. They KNOW that it is a facade.

The electorate are a lot more sophisticated than some politicians credit them with. They can handle divisions in parties over issues. They find silencing dissent as you are proposing a turn off.

While you’re at it , ask the 4 of them that were in cabinet if they feel at all responsible for the dire state our country & its economy are in & what they would do about it will you?

Boudicca – I think it’s time you aquainted yourself with my comments policy, particularly the part that says: “I have been very liberal in my approach to comment moderation, so that even the most sneering and nasty comment gets published if I reckon it’s not defamatory. Well, no more.”

Tom,
While I should expect Ed Miliband to accept a Shadow Cabinet post if David wins, you may remember that Enoch Powell (admittedly he did not stand in the non-election for SuperMac’s successor) refused to serve under Sir Alec Douglas-Home.
I consider it perfectly acceptable for an individual to say that he/she would like to lead but would not be willing to take a subordinate role under one or other alternative candidates. If there was an election for leader of the PLP and 35 fellow MPs nominated you, 34 nominated David M and 33 nominated Hun Sen/Leon Trotsky, would you publicly declare your willingness to accept a front-bench post under Hun Sen/Leon Trotsky if he was elected?

Anyone elected to the Shadow Cabinet must be offered a portfolio by the leader

I understand that Hattie was elected deputy leader of the Labour party, but Brown never treated her as such

Are we saying that the person with most votes for the shadow cabinet is guaranteed the “top” portfolio? Or is the Labour Party still about patronage?

If Diane doesn’t get Leader, she would make a great foil to IDS at the DWP

Stronghold Barricades: “Are we saying that the person with most votes for the shadow cabinet is guaranteed the “top” portfolio? Or is the Labour Party still about patronage?”

Yeah, keep telling yourself that electing a Shadow Cabinet is less democratic than the Tory system of appointing it (patronage).

Is exercising patronage any better than being patronising?
Any chance of apologising for your male chauvinist remark about ‘serious candidates’?

There was, as you know, nothing male chauvinist in that comment. I don’t consider Diane to be a serious candidate, but obviously not because she is a woman. I would make the same judgment of John McDonnell had he made it onto the ballot paper.

If Diane Abbot’s response to your letter is anything like her recent alleged response to Wayne David, then I’d love to read her reply.

As my example of Hattie shows, the Labour party may vote, but even when candidates “win” they do not necessarily occupy the post that they thought they had won.

Thus, Labour policy appears to be obfuscation of patronage. I would rather have a system where it is recognised than dressed up as something that it is not.

Hopefully, by the time of the election, you will be supporting Diane and leaving those who seek to distance themselves from their previous ministry decisions far behind.

Tom

Neither Tony Blair nor Neil Kinnock were prepared to stand for Deputy Leader when a vacancy occured. Their view was Leader or nothing.

Why should it be any different now? Its disappointing that you seem to repeatedly attack the other candidates who are standing against David Milliband through your blog. I’d rather we had a civilised contest than a civil war please.

Actually, for all she sent her kids to private school, I’d say Diane is the *only* serious candidate.

The Miliband’s are both arch-blairite new-labour luvvies, complete cappuccino politicians (all froth, no coffee).
Balls & Burnham are hardly much different; slightly more “brownite” admittedly, but same score…

Diane’s the only one who didn’t sign up to Brown’s cabinet. The only one NOT tainted by one of the worst prime-ministers ever to hold the office till he absolutely had to call elections.

The fact is she’s also the only one who doesn’t look like she’s just stumbled out of the Conservative Club, with the pinstripe suits, oxbridge degree, male, mid-to-late-forties; hell, you could put a blue tie on them and I’d think they HAD just stumbled out the Conservative Club!!
Image shouldn’t matter that much, and whether someone’s black, white, male, female etc. shouldn’t matter, but the fact is Diane represents two large portions of the wider population who’ve rarely if ever seen one of “their own” in a powerful position. When was the lat time the Labour party had a female leader, or a leader with a minority ethnic background?
Oh yeah, that’s right. Never.
So to instantly write her off because she didn’t toady up to Brown when he was handing out the portfolios is to do her a massive disservice. In fact, I’d assert that because she stayed well clear of that guddle, it makes her far stronger as Leader.

How does Cameron take on someone like Diane Abbot? Apart from the aforementioned schooling incident, he’s got nothing; can’t just use the same tired arguments he could against Milliband et al; those won’t wash. Can’t even pull out the traditional “ah, but this was the fault of the last government” because she can simply respond with a “Yes, my party made many mistakes in power, but this wasn’t one of them, and I didn’t vote for it, so etc. etc.”.
But of course you won’t vote for her, nor will anyone else who thinks Milliband will get in, because if you vote against him, bang goes your brief.
Shame that even after a massive drubbing and the clearest indication that the People think New Labour sucks, you still all think your best hope lies with one of it’s biggest supporters.

I meant to add to my huge post, but somehow forgot;
how can you write off Diane? She’s the most experienced candidate.

She’s served in the House far longer than the clones; Milliband the Elder and Burnham were only elected in 2001, with Balls and Milliband the Younger only in 2005!!
How on earth can someone who’s only been in the job for just over 5 years be senior to someone who’s been an MP since 1987??!!
Just because the other four greased the right hands, and stood on the right people to climb up the greasy, slimy pole that is internal party politics doesn’t mean they’re better or more serious candidates.
Re-examine your position on this Tom. You don’t have to vote with the crowd just because “everyone thinks they’re more serious”. They’re not. Just more popular.

Then why bother to write to her?

Math Campbell: “When was the lat time the Labour party had a female leader, or a leader with a minority ethnic background?
Oh yeah, that’s right. Never.”

Unlike your own party, you mean?

Touché. Although we did have Margaret Ewing as our party’s President for many years.
It is also widely expected that when Alex Salmond chooses to retire (though that may be a good decade or two away yet!), hopefully from his position as Scotland’s first Prime Minister, that Nicola will succeed him; a lot of people in the party seem to think that’s the way we’ll all vote (we don’t do coronations!)…

Sorry, my heads up my bum today. Make that Winnie Ewing

Proof-reading fail

So the Tories, with Disraeli and Thatcher, are the only party to have achieved diversity targets at the top level?
Own goal?
PS David Lloyd George does not count as an ethnic minority since the Welsh were an ethnic majority in Wales as the Scots were in Scotland in 1924.

Ah the wisdom of solo man

“to lead with humility, the courage to lead with integrity, and the compassion to lead with generosity”.

And they reckon the Queen of Sheba came from Kenya

I have a copy of her birth certificate

With the notable exception of George Washington no successful leader of any country has ever been humble. It is not a role suited, or appealing, to the humble.

This is an interesting question. We all enter a competition to win but surely the real winners and the ones in power. I really hope the best person gets this job if they can balance the path required to get this country back to a position where we can thrive and not hear ‘that our lives will change for the worse’bring it on.