A blog by Luke Akehurst about politics, elections, and the Labour Party - With subtitles for the Hard of Left. Just for the record: all the views expressed here are entirely personal and do not necessarily represent the positions of any organisations I am a member of.

Monday, May 07, 2007

Hazel's policies

Hazel's policy platform is now online here. What do people think?

Over on politicalbetting.com they are saying this:

"The dark horse is Hazel Blears, who knows the party well enough not to be standing at all if she wasn’t confident of getting enough nominations. As some of Harriet’s support is simply on the basis of gender balance, an early Hazel push with 30-odd nominations could easily siphon off some of Harriet’s nominees."

Presumably the 29 already listed on her website mean getting to "30-odd" could happen very soon.


Anonymous Chris Gale said...

Not ONE mention of animal welfare anywhere in that document.
Labour has a good record on animal welfare (with lots still to be done, ban on seal imports please urgently)and I do wish our senior people would actually mention the subject!
The ban on hunting was hugely important and, as we have a Tory party which has as its leader a man very closely aligned with the hunters (he is one himself), we should be saying how it is Labour that will keep the ban in place and how proud we are to have put the Act into law.
The animal welfare community and the millions of people who value animals and wildlife, are a hugely important electoral constituency.

9:28 pm, May 07, 2007

Anonymous Andy said...

I've just had a quick read of the section on 'modern workplaces' and it struck me as mainly 'motherhood and apple pie' stuff (although some of the ideas on unions seem pretty wide of the mark*, there is nothing really bad there).

There is nothing that makes me think there is any serious understanding of challenges and policy options beyond the usual platitudes about competition and more training and skills.

*for example, how are trade unions supposed to develop their 'insurance' role when it is much more expensive to provide representation to individual employees than it is to support collective groups of workers and revenues are falling due to declining membership. Plus the current legal framework doesn't confer a right to representation, just a right to be accompanied?

9:59 pm, May 07, 2007

Blogger John Gray said...

Sorry Chris, Not many LP votes on animal welfare. There also will not be much thought about any candidates welfare in the coming contest I think.

10:07 pm, May 07, 2007

Anonymous Chris Gale said...


You are wrong on that.
There are many votes in it.
It is an issue which dominates the postbags of MPs and is important to so many people.
Labour should be talking about it and exposing Cameron as the political mouthpiece of the Countryside Alliance that he is.

6:17 am, May 08, 2007

Blogger Chris Paul said...

Why would a Deputy Leader NEED a programme? If they want to put up programmes - apart from the Cruddite renewal one - they should run for leader or get themselves on the NPF.

10:12 am, May 08, 2007

Anonymous James said...

I second Chris Paul's take on this amtter.

10:19 am, May 08, 2007

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I increasingly wonder what some of the candidates in the cabinet hope to do as Deputy that they couldn't already do? Do they fear that they've been ignored in the past and that by being Deputy Leader they'll be more taken notice of by the new leader? If so, what an indictment on the current cabinet.

10:42 am, May 08, 2007

Blogger jdc said...

It reads more like a manifesto for Leader than anything specific about what a Deputy would do, but there's not a huge amount with which anyone would disagree - though I am sad that she hasn't held to her firm line on crime. More community sentencing and more conditional discharges? No thanks!

11:30 am, May 08, 2007

Anonymous pregethwr said...

Whoever 'Red Sky' is, he or she is stunningly badly informed.

2:35 pm, May 08, 2007

Anonymous Still verging towards Cruddas said...

I'll be fair - good on her for coming up with this. Some of the other candidates just don't seem to have any ideas at all and are instead relying on some kind of strange personality appeal (which in their cases isn't very appealing!).

I do get the feeling, however, that Blears is just trying to be the on-message version of Cruddas. And it isn't working. Her vision for party renewal is hardly considerable and innovative, let alone inspiring. Much of her rhetoric is spot-on but I - and I suspect many others - just don't find it convincing when she's so fundamentally reluctant to admit that the party and government has made some mistakes.

Also, the document focuses too heavily on government policy which I feel shouldn't be so relevant.

Good on her for trying, but it's not enogh.

8:08 pm, May 08, 2007

Anonymous still verging... said...

*that should be 'enough'. I can't comment on whether her policy platform is "enogh".

p.s Has anyone else noticed how many blank pages there are in this document? It reinforces the feeling that it is all a bit desparate and lightweight...

8:10 pm, May 08, 2007

Anonymous Anti-Hain said...

Actually, compared to Peter Hain's pathetic 8 page effort Hazel Blears seems full of ideas.


He really is quite slimey. He's been quoted as saying all the other candidates just offer more of the same, whereas he only differentiates himself by occassionaly going off message!

Actually, I've seen a quote in which he claims that Cruddas wants to take the party back to the 80s. Yeah, because Cruddas is really standing on a platform of unilateral disarmament, withdrawl from Europe, and widespread nationalisation. What a disingenuous prick.

11:14 am, May 09, 2007

Anonymous anti anti-hain said...

You Cruddies are just jealous of Peter's lovely orange glow!

2:25 pm, May 09, 2007


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Free Hit Counters
OfficeDepot Discount