Five Get Overexcited

I am starting to reach some conclusions about my vote(s) (as a Labour Party member and trade unionist) in the forthcoming Labour leadership election. For me there is no clear and obvious contender.  Each candidate has strong and weak points, which at least suggests that they are human.

I have been fortunate over the last few years to have met, listened to and observed the four male candidates at work, I have only seen Diane Abbot on the TV but that is not her fault as she has been bypassed for high office.

Andy Burnham is probably the most human of the candidates (this could be my bias in favour of people who have a regional accent). I was at a small voluntary sector event where he spoke and I thought he pitched he presentation very well and responded intelligently to his audience. I also thought he performed very well in the debate on care and did try to create a consensus for change with the other parties.  For me though he is the candidate of the right in this election and very much a, gut, blairite.

David Miliband is the front runner and currently tipped to win.  Whereas Burnham is a gut blairite, David appears to be an intellectual one.  As foreign secretary he has failed to move Britain’s policy from being anything other than a subsidiary of the USA.

Diane Abbott is very articulate and made the right calls on some important issues including the war on Iraq and detention without trial.  I think she needs to have a more high profile role and I am not one of those who thinks that her TV work rules her out.  The nagging doubt is about choice of private schooling for her children. I have read and heard her defence and it is not convincing. If you are part of the Government promoting universal services such as education and health I think you have to use those services.

Ed Balls. I have seen him speak and was not convinced. If Miliband is the modern Blair, Ed Balls appears to be the continuation of Brown.  I was interested to see him positioning himself as the candidate of the left but began to wonder what he was doing in Government as he criticised its policies, as a figure at the heart of the Brown prime ministership. I am concerned about his comments on immigration.  Immigration only pushes down wages if there aren’t enough legal protections for workers and it causes pressure on public services if they are not resourced to respond. For me one of the greatest domestic failures of the Labour Government was the lack of provision of new social housing to meet the rising population and being able to balance the needs of immigrant and indigenous populations.

I have seen Ed Miliband in events related to social enterprise and in his climate change role.  He always seemed relaxed talking with people and speaking at events (except of course when he came onto the church roof on Whiteladies Road – his fear of heights is more severe than mine). He had the foresight to shift the targets in the climate change act following a lobby of environmental and international development groups, I think other characters may have stuck their heels in.  All the accounts of his role at Copenhagen have been glowing.  I know some see his position on Iraq is populist and a real test would be switching the position on Afghanistan.

I agree that he needs to learn to speak English rather than wonkish, but Ed Miliband is the candidate I will be supporting to win the election for Labour Leader.

Read Full Post »

Follow Me, Follow You

I am finding the Labour leadership contest distinctly uninspiring.  It is almost a policy free zone amid talking about listening, reconnecting and progress what is missing is any sense of what the potential leaders actually believe in.

Here are some quotes from candidates (can you guess which is which?):

1) “I think it’s really important we don’t just talk to ourselves, we’ve got to go out and hear what the public say,”

2) “The party has lost touch with our voters and we must reconnect and regain our sense of idealism.”

3)”I think that our conversation with the public broke down. That’s essentially what I think happened. We have to restart that conversation with the most precious asset that each and every one of us has in this room.”

4)”had our fingers in our ears and our hands over our eyes”

So far we have had not a single concrete policy proposal.  No ideas on how to reduce poverty, tackle climate change or improve education.  Listening is important but it is not enough.  It could be argued that the problem with Labour was that it was too timid in office after 1997 because it was fixated on listening to focus groups and testing every policy before moving forward and desperate not to offend the Tory press.

The most interesting statement to date was the one by Jon Cruddas setting out why he wasn’t standing.

I have set out what I want to hear some real proposals on in a previous post, so far all I can hear is silence.  John McDonnell and Diane Abbott have not put their names forward as ‘left’ candidates but it is unlikely that either will get enough support from MPs to enter the ballot. This was the mistake made by the Brown bid, no real political contest will damage the party.  A debate about which leader is better at listening and connecting is unlikely to be engaging. Also one has to ask why these ex-cabinet members haven’t been listening and connecting over the last few years.

It was real leadership which created the NHS not a focus group. Now is the time for dynamic and principled leadership not more tired management speak.

Related Post:

https://bristolwestpaul.wordpress.com/2010/05/11/the-leader/

Read Full Post »