Vocal Voices

Most sensible ones amongst us agree that HM government needs a functional and effective opposition. For the past 100 years or so His/Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition has been provided by Labour.

That is no longer the case, and even a grand coalition would not provide any opposition - that's where we are.

Labour is in disarray with a multiple three-way split of hard left, centre-left and centre and all their sub groups. It is currently going through the motions of selecting a new leader from an uninspiring bunch. Given all its capable MPs it would be hard to pick such a group of losers on a million to one bet, yet there they are, all sides fighting like rats in a sack for supremacy: but does it matter?

Given that the government has a majority of 80+ and opposition being no more than an academic exercise then Labour might as well get it out of the system... and then get it right.

All very well but I'm not convinced there are any "capable" Labour MPs, mind. Who've you got in mind - Hilary Benn? Stephen Kinnock? (that'll please Crommers ) Dan Jarvis? Sadiq Khan? (well, that would please Donald Trump …. )

Labour are (hopefully) an irrelevance for at least the next 5 years and possibly longer.

TheOstrich wrote:Who've you got in mind -

Benn, Jarvis, Creasy, Cooper, Reeves, Flint (once parachuted in via a by-election), Sobel. They might not be so well known but they are out there.

TheOstrich wrote:Labour are (hopefully) an irrelevance for at least the next 5 years and possibly longer.

This is so wrong, but also so right. All opposition will be irrelevant for the next five years - it will be for Bojo and his ERG and blue-rinse pals to take ownership and screw things up all by themselves. However, in the long term we need an opposition, and as things stand (with FPTP) it can only be Labour.

Workingman wrote:

TheOstrich wrote:Who've you got in mind -

Benn, Jarvis, Creasy, Cooper, Reeves, Flint (once parachuted in via a by-election), Sobel. They might not be so well known but they are out there.
.

Hm. Well, we have been here before. What was Blair's majority in 1997, 160 seats?
Effectively there is no opposition for the next five years, unless the Supreme Court get uppity.
And even then they could be abolished.
Johnson has shown a ruthless streak. Former don't-you-know-who-I-ams like Hammond, Grieve, Clarke, Soubry et al have been drop kicked out of the Tory party, a previously unthinkable scenario.
I reckon the Tory MPs now will be "on message".
Not much chance of an anti Bojo internal putsch.

Labour are in a real mess. Corbynites vs Blairites, losing votes outside the cities, Scotland lost forever.
Out of your candidates WM my favourite would be Rachel Reeves. Brains and appeal. But she is Jewish and would be mauled by the momentum loonies.
Benn I find loathesome, ditto the exquisite little metrosexual Kinnock. Cooper's seat is now a marginal and is she yesterday's woman? Desperate Dan Jarvis got a shock too. A 3,000 Labour majority in Barnsley?!
Biggest problem of all for Labour, the system used to elect the leader. Pay £3 and vote.
Atm the Corbynites are in the majority in the eligible voters.
If that stays the same you're looking at Rebecca Long Bailey as leader and a certain loss at the next election.

There is plenty of evidence that the electorate is largely centrist with only mild leanings to the left or right. Maybe the time is right for Labour to go Long-Bailey / Rayner / Abacus and get the Leninist / Marxist / Trotskyist thing over and done with for a generation or two.

If this government runs its full term there will be two sets of local elections. Wipe-outs in both of those should give Labour the evidence, if any is needed, that it was not just Corbyn who was the problem at the last general election, it was the direction the party is headed.

Will the hint be taken? The country better hope so.

Workingman wrote: Maybe the time is right for Labour to go Long-Bailey / Rayner / Abacus and get the Leninist / Marxist / Trotskyist thing over and done with for a generation or two.

This could happen. Another Corbynite as leader, another GE defeat and then what? Either the Blairites/moderates whatever you want to call them regain control of the Labour party or the Labour party splits - thus weakening the opposition to the Tories even more.

Workingman wrote:If this government runs its full term there will be two sets of local elections. Wipe-outs in both of those should give Labour the evidence, if any is needed, that it was not just Corbyn who was the problem at the last general election

It wasn't just Corbyn, not by a long shot. Personally unpopular parachuted MP's, the party's evasive policy on B*e*i*, and the free everything for everybody.
It suits one side of the Labour party to blame Corbyn for everything because it takes the spotlight off their own failings.

At the moment it's really two parties in one, with the least electorally popular half holding the power. As things stand I don't see how moderates regain power. Things can and do change though.

I think that I see the tactics.

The left / Momentum will only put up one candidate, Long-Bailey, in the hope that she gets 50%+1 of the votes.

The centrists will put up three hoping that in the first round they get 1st or 2nd then, 3rd and 4th places and thus prevent a L-B win. Fourth drops out and the votes are redistributed, which in theory means that they should go to the other centrist candidates and maybe push one over the 50% line. If that does not happen then third drops out and again, in theory, all votes should go to the only centrist left to produce a winner.

If it was only down to the PLP then Momentum and the NEC would be out of business, but the big unknown is the membership. Many of us on the outside looking in will be hoping that the membership takes its lead from Labour MPs and goes 2.5:1 for a centrist, even though he or she might only be a place-holder up to the next general election.

Could be. Obviously Starmer is the chosen one of the Blairite tendency and he'll have a big push from friendly papers like the Mirror, too. Rebecca Long-Bailey is equally obviously the chosen Momentumite, but this I can't see at all. She appears to be a bit lacking in charisma and won't have any backing from the papers. I think the Corbynites have seriously chosen the wrong person. They could switch though. Like you say the great unknown is the membership.
One thing that does puzzle me - why is the process so drawn out? The election was on December the 12th and the next leader won't be known until the 4th of April.
Surely they could get it done and dusted in a few weeks?

Is it tactical? There are local elections in May when Labour will suffer badly again. Having only been in place for a few weeks the new leader will be able to claim, correctly, that they had no time to influence things. Being in place for a few months muddies that water.

The results will hopefully allow the new leader to steer the party away from Momentum and on to a more electable path. We need a strong opposition and we haven't got one. Labour might as well only pay lip service for this term and work towards the next one. It is either that or the country needs a new political party big enough to form a meaningful coalition with others.

I see Jess Phillips has dropped out. That's a shame because she is an evangelical centrist that many would vote for.

So now it looks as though Starmer will get it. That is a big mistake. He has all the charisma of a vegan sausage roll gone cold, and very few outside of the narrow political bubble seem to like him.

Nandy might be a good side bet. I have seen her in a few interviews and she answers questions intelligently as well as refusing to be intimidated by the likes of Andrew Neil.