Just when I thought it was no longer possible to get wound up by the Deputy leadership/leadership issue, up pops an e-mail from Peter Watt, General Secretary of the Labour Party. Citing Gordon Brown as the "only validly nominated" candidate, praising the "huge show of support for said Dear Leader from CLPs , Trade unions etc etc etc. How many times do these people need to be told. Brown is NOT, was not elected by anyone other than the PLP. We never HAD a choice. Many CLPs nominated him because , hello, there wasn't ANYONE ELSE. My CLP as it happens is I'm glad to say one of over 200 which did not join in the Albanian non-election. If we had been allowed, we would have nominated John McDonnell anyway. Oh, the other point of the e-mail was to ask the Deputy Leadership candidates virtual questions. The only question I would ask ( and I can't be bothered) is this;why have all my friends in the Labour Party found it utterly impossible to feel positive about any of you and why didn't any of you have the guts to try and challenge Brown? THE END.
Monday, 18 June 2007
THE FINAL STRAW.........
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
The rulebook is the rulebook Susan. Change it or lump it. Life goes on.
Hi Chris.
The rule book is the rule book and it is wrong in this instance. You might not be interested in democracy and/or debate but there are plenty of LP members who will agree to differ with you. Just think . While you are saying life goes on , Labour is heading for a very possible defeat by Cameron at the next election. Meanwhile people like yourself and the out-of-touch leadership are living in the 90s. You cant have 'renewel' without democracy.
Ian
Dear Susan
Chris is right. John knew that to get on the ballot paper he needed 44 members of the PLP to nominate him. He could have spent more time in the tea-room, or better still with the Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MPs in the first place.
Will that lesson be learned by the Left when it comes to keeping the new Leadership on message better than over the past 10 years?
THE BEGINNING.
With respect, Peter, John attends every Socialist Campaign Group meeting. He will tell you there are often only a handful of MPs there.As you know, it's effectively moribund.
Even if ALL the Campaign Group MPs had nominated John ( and 19 out of 24 did plus 10 others from beyond it) he would not have got on the ballot because of the spineless attitude of the PLP.Michael Meacher spent plenty of time in the tea-rooms and did disastrously.
The whole point of John's campaign was it was a grassrots one.In the end, what you perceive as a weakness will be its strength because the Left on the ground is not giving up.Far from it.We will continue to build support( I am working on a project right now) and campaign on ALL the issues which we were unable to debate with Gordon Brown.Yes,life goes on. And so does John McDonnell's fight for Real Labour policies. As you say, the beginning......
"The whole point of John's campaign was it was a grassrots one."
Fine, but then stop whinging. Either you cared about getting 44 or you didn't.
Dear Susan
The issue of JMcD's campaign was not of a few members attending meetings. The SCG never invited nominations from among its members and had a vote as to whom it would back as the candidate for leader.
That was a problem right from the start. It was about democracy in the SCG.
Sad, but (unless I am completely misinformed) that's the truth. So let's learn the lessons and move on.
Peter, I AM moving on.
But seeing as the issue has been raised again clearly I care more about democracy in the Labour Party than some members of the SCG(those 5 who nominated Brown) and most members of the PLP who acted like spineless sheep -many against the declared wishes of their activists.
The "problem" over the leadership was not the SCG but the overwhelmingly supine attitude of the PLP. How exactly will they keep Brown "on message" when they have given him carte blanche to do exactly as he pleases? Likewise the unions.
Post a Comment