So far the resignation letters have been less than straight up about the motives of the resigners.
Tom's one says: "Your leadership has been visionary and remarkable" but "I no longer believe that your remaining in office is in the interest of either the party or the country.
How and why this situation has arisen no longer matters."
My view is the "how and why" is exactly what matters.
We need to know what the Brownite critique is.
If it is for subjective reasons - e.g. they just like Gordon more, or personal ambition, then it reflects on them as resigners rather badly.
If it is for objective policy reasons then we need to know what those are because they will help Labour members determine who to back in any future leadership election.
For instance, if the Brown critique is limited to wanting different or less public service reform (i.e. abandoning or diluting the choice agenda) then despite the recent mess I would be reasonably enthusiastic about Brown being given a clear run against the Hard Left.
But if the Brown critique of Blair includes his foreign policy then I reserve the right to go and campaign for John Reid on principle because I will not vote for any leadership candidate who wants to change the current line on the Middle East.
Tom can get away with saying "How and why this situation has arisen no longer matters. " His candidate for the leadership of the Labour Party can't.
Similarly, the "deal" as outlined very sensibly by Ed Balls in the Observer on Sunday, has always been an orderly transition. What is going on now is not orderly. If Brown doesn't act to put a stop to this then my take is he has broken that deal and a) Blair would be jusified in saying "forget it, I'm staying until the next election, you're already fighting me so you'll have to finish the job if you want rid of me" and b) Reid or Johnson would be justified in throwing their hats in the ring for the succession.
The ball is in Brown's court.
actually are you sure that GB started it? or maybe has he lost the control of events?
ReplyDeleteIt certainly looks to me like Brown started. I am disgusted at the behaviour of Tom Watson and his cronies.
ReplyDeleteWe will regret this treatment of Blair when he has gone.
My hope is that someone who is loyal to the membership of this party and who is not so self indulgent to stab Labour's greatest leader in the back will stand in the Labour leadership race. I would certainly both campaign and vote for AJ or John Reid over Brown.
"It certainly looks to me like Brown started. I am disgusted at the behaviour of Tom Watson and his cronies."
ReplyDeletebut not all people involved are/were close Brownites...Sion Simon and Chris Bryant weren't usually associated with Brown.
"I would certainly both campaign and vote for AJ or John Reid over Brown. "
I almost prefer the LDs to John Reid....
Brown's aim is to avoid any sort of leadership election and for that he wants Balir to resign asap. It's a coup, pure and simple and the vitims are us - the ordinary members of the party who are supposed to have a say.
ReplyDeleteBrown says he was present at the founding of New Labour - well what is less New Labour than this disgraceful attempt to cut us out and leave this to a parliamentary clique.
The fact is, though, that Gordon hasd all but destoyed his premiership before he's even begun it. The electorate will not forgive this behaviour.
I feel very bitter about all this, not because of Tony personally (though we owe him more than this) but because people have so quickly forgotten the lessons we all had to learn so painfully between 1979 and 1997.
"but not all people involved are/were close Brownites...Sion Simon and Chris Bryant weren't usually associated with Brown."
ReplyDeleteBut they didn't get jobs in Government they thought they deserved.
"The fact is, though, that Gordon hasd all but destoyed his premiership before he's even begun it. The electorate will not forgive this behaviour"
ReplyDeleteFunny that tories and Libdems usually say the opposite of Gordon: that he has no balls (apart Ed) to knife Blair.
But as you said voters usually don't like assassins, so that's why he can't knife him
I think it's all rather sad. I don't know what I blame more: the self-delusion and self-importance of Blair, or the aimless ambition and personality politics of Brown? Luke, I fear you are optimistic in your quest for a policy basis to this farce: I fear it has nothing to do with policy and everything to do with personalities and ambition.
ReplyDeleteAs someone from the Left of the party, I hope we keep out of this (other than to try and knock some heads together) - an open leadership election some time next year with a proper discussion about the policies of the candidates was on the cards without this messy business which reflects no credit on the Chancellor or the Prime Minister.
well, I take back what I said.....it now seems there has been an involvement from the Brownites.
ReplyDeleteBrown can pay for it in the end...it depends on how things develop.
Luke, your post is a good illustration of the factors that we'll need to consider when voting for a new leader. You're right when you say we need to look at policy but that means we'll all need to make comprimises as no one candidate will reflect what we believe.
ReplyDeleteFor example I support Blair, despite his Middle East policy. I support the Iraq war but thought Blair got it very wrong over Israel's invasion of Lebanon. But one policy, one issue is not a reason to lose faith.