Sore political heads
It's morning after a terrible Glaswegian night before for the Labour Party. Gordon Brown will not be the only one who woke today with a very sore political head. The voters of Glasgow East have ensured that nowhere can now be called a safe Labour seat.
Overnight, a Labour majority of over 13,500 in Labour's formerly third safest seat in Scotland, and its 25th safest seat in the UK, simply vanished.
On polling day, the Westminster village - politicians and journalists alike - had convinced itself that Labour would just squeak home.
What's more, the collective mood was that it was time for the summer break, that the fate of the prime minister could wait until we all gathered again in the run-up for the conference season. Many, therefore, will have been shocked by the news they awoke to this morning. That means that what follows next is completely unpredictable.
Gordon Brown at least has an opportunity in the speech he gives today to describe how he plans to get himself, and his party, out of the hole they find themselves in. As he does, Labour MPs will be pondering whether their prospects are better with him or without. They will have the summer to debate, to discuss, to plot their next moves.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~53~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
So Gordon Brown's reaction is just "getting on with the job" - More of the same. Exactly what has to happen beofre he senses that people are not happy with the way he is doing things ?
Given the state fo the Labour Party finances and votes like this one, it is possible that when a gneral election is called that the parliamentary Labour Party could actually cease to exist.
Complain about this comment
Unpredictable ? Surely not, Nick.
The game is up now. There are only 2 possible outcomes to this result. Either Brown stands down as Prime Minister ... or he insists on soldeiering on knowing he cannot win the next general election and he is therefore ousted by a palace coup.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown is blessed (or cursed) with what he believes is a G-d-given position to fulfill. He believes he is the natural choice to be prime minister and this divine task is his alone. Blair had to be replaced by him, and despite the ever spiralling downhill turn of his chariot of fire, Brown is determined to continue. Cherie Blair must be laughing her head off, together with the opposition.
Complain about this comment
Doesn't Brown realise the people don't want him to "get on with the job" ? He has destroyed the country while in his previous job. We want rid of him and his tax-n-squander party !
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown responded just like most of us thought he would.
Hes like the manager of a failing football team that keeps trotting out the same excuses. Eventually the fans get sick of them as it becomes obvious he doesnt have the answers to the problems.
If you have one iota of common sense you have to wonder what Gordon Brown has been thinking with some of his decisions.
I think its hard to not come to the conclusion he is simply not up to the job.
On a side note - as someone thats voted for all the main parties and a Scot its great to see a change in a Labour stronghold. Some in Central Scotland would vote Labour no matter who is leading and what their policies are - the Ice is breaking!!
Complain about this comment
A glaswegian kiss nicely delivered
Sore heads you bet
Prepare for panic.
Complain about this comment
Gordon can pretend to listen now. So far that has consisted of planning for nuclear power that the majority don't want. Also trying to push through a GM "debate" that hasn't happened because 80% are opposed.
So he's lost Glasgow East -worse than I thought. It means that the head in the sand approach to the 2010 Scottish referendum is working well then.
Nobody will want his job but he's going to take Honest John Majors title of the most mediocre Prime Minister for a century or so.
His legacy.
We get the end of the UK and probable energy shortfalls because Labour did not invest aggressively enough in renewables at the right time. A lot of what we have is in Scotland and Wales and they may be separated soon.
Complain about this comment
Sometimes it's nice to be wrong - I really didn't think the SNP could do it!
OK, just a by-election, and Labour will probably retake it at the General Election, when the voters have the difficult choice of either voting for constitutional change here, or voting against having the Tories in power at UK level. Voting in Scotland is a little more complicated than south of the border.
The result is good for the Scots and, and consequently, good for the English. Maybe time for the Welsh and northern Irish to consider what they want their constitutional situation to be after 2010.
You British guys need to consider how meaningful your identity is, when parts of your country vote
Complain about this comment
A new film? Carry on Gordon?
Complain about this comment
Labour now have a lot to answer for. They have made the biggest mistake in their entire history. Thinking Scotland was their safe territory they created a big local council: the scottish assembly. Jobs for the labour boys when they next lost Westminster.
The only problem is that Nats have got it sussed. With what little Labour talent there is located in Westminster, Labour's C team left in Scotland don't look too good against Alex Salmond (the SNP don't have anyone else of note).
Do 5 million Scotts really need 3 tiers of Government? Who pays?
This mess will have to be sorted out and soon. And not by independence.
Complain about this comment
Keep doing your job Gordon, keep doing your job....
Meanwhile, at every opportunity, we'll do ours and vote against Labour....
Take the hint and say this prayer
Oh Gordon, what in heavens,
shallowed be thy name.
The Kingdom's done,
truley well done,
with Labour in year eleven.
Give up this day, you're politically dead.
And give us back our stealth taxes,
as we get back those 10p's taxed against us.
And lead us not into desperation,
and deliver us from Europe.
For it's not your kingdom, your power or your glory. Not ever, ever, ever.
Ahem
Complain about this comment
I posted this on "oops" but things have moved on.
Brown, did everything a dictator usually does. Now he has no-where to turn.
He
1 Got rid of Blair after plotting against him for 10 years
2 Surrounded himself with weak yes-men and women.
3 Marginalised any real competition for PM by banishing them from cabinet
4 Got himself a Chancellor who does what he says
5 Jumps up and down when anyone questions him and is a bully
6 Makes ALL of the decisions
7 Thinks he is infallible.
All of the great dictators have done the same, except they were able to send the opposition to Siberia or eliminate them.
And in the end they go down with a wimper, having done huge damage to their counties.
Labour need to say what Sir Roger Keyes said to Chamberlain in 1940, repeating the words of Oliver Cromwell
"You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go"
Result. Chamberlain went, Churchill was made PM, we won the war, and we are all now British and not German.
All it needs is a brave Labour MP, if there is one!!!
Complain about this comment
This could be a seminal moment. Mr Brown has just lost any last vestige of leverage he might have had with the leaders of the trades unions. Expect his paymasters to make policy demands that will render Labour even more unelectable.
Brown must be ruing the day he funked the general election he would have won. I suppose we'll have to tolerate him until the election. His heirs apparent in the form of Balls, Byrne, Burnham, Milliband et al are equally unappetising as not one of these callow youths has done a proper job or actually run anything.
Complain about this comment
Labour MPs should now ponder the folly of their refusal to have a leadership contest and hold a coronation instead. A contest might well have exposed Brown's inability to communicate with a broad cross section of society including many Labour voters - even Scottish Labour voters. Instead he is resented my much of the populace who think he has been foisted on them and lacks legitimacy. That he seems utterly incompetent doesn't help either.
Complain about this comment
Nick
GB is supposed to be speaking to the unions sometime soon. I'm sure they will hold him to ransom over the defeat in Glasgow by promising votes if he gives them what they want.
Any coverage of this if it's happened, or if it hasn't, will there be any?
Complain about this comment
re my #8
"You British guys need to consider how meaningful your identity is, when parts of your country vote" should have continued "to dismember it."
#10 Blogpolice
I quite agree that there are too many layers of Government, the only question is which one(s) to remove.
If you live in Scotland, then your views matter, and we could have a rational debate about them.
If you live elsewhere, then you may have some useful points to add to our debate (though you'll need to display some evidence, instead of making assertions of your own opinion).
Complain about this comment
#12 mikepko
Have I got you right?
Brown resigns, the UK Parliament forms a National Government, and we subsequently win a war against Germany.
Aren't Iraq and Afghanistan enough for you?
Complain about this comment
Nick, Nu (Improved) Labour and all the rest!
The late Edward John Smith was just 'getting on with the job' as all around sank underneath him.
History is now repeating herself with a big wide (TB) grin.
After Labour arrived Nu (Improved) Labour, so what comes next? Diet Labour, Labour lite, or Classic Labour?
May we all live in interesting times!
Complain about this comment
In the US, a sitting president has never been deposed in times of economic success. Also a sitting president has never held on in an economic downturn. It looks like this is holding true for the UK as well.
Some say we should feel sorry for GB as the problems are not of his doing. I dissagree he supported the Iraq war which has been one of the major factors in the oil price rises. He has borrowed to the point we no longer have any reserves.
Whilst the current situation may not have been avoidable it can be said that they have been made worse by the actions of the Labour government over the last 10 years.
It's about time for a well deserved pasting, I think.
Complain about this comment
Ref 9. Blogpolice.
Carry on Regardless 1961
The Helping Hands agency employs a range of talentless odd balls to perform a range of everyday jobs. Even the simplest of tasks get bungled by this range of incompetents
The film is unique in the series, in that it is more a series of interlinking sketches than being one continuous plot.
Sounds much more appropriate.
Complain about this comment
15 shelling
Its happening NOW.
The BBC says
"At the Warwick conference, the unions, which now account for the vast majority of Labour Party funding, are reportedly putting about 100 demands on issues ranging from new rights for workers to free school meals for all primary school pupils.
The three-day forum will be considering new ideas and amendments to current policies.
It brings together 55 Constituency Labour Parties and 30 trade unions, as well as other socialist movements.
It divides policy into six areas - Britain in the world; communities; crime and justice; education; health; prosperity. "
Complain about this comment
Dear all
Reading a detailed biography of Gordon Brown 2 years ago made it abundantly clear that his extreme obsessive personality is the reality rather than a media creation. This led me to believe he woul dbe high risk as a leader.
But I thought his political skill and experience would get him through OK - however much I personally dislike him.
But the mistake over last Autumn's election that never was - the fact that is showed how cynical he was treating the public - was in itself an error from which there could be no recovery. Let alone any subsequent errors.
I cannot see that the public will ever elect him as PM. The Labour Party has an impossibe choice as what to do - but it is a consequence of having a leader elected unopposed last year.
When the political histories of this era are written people will look back with astonishment that one of the two main parties (moreover the party in Government!)elected aleader unopposed. I do not know what the Labour Party should do. But lose they will. If they believe the tide can be turned back they are in a deluded state. The country is rejecting their leader and most of their policies too.
Complain about this comment
Calling all post masters
500 New post offices to open in Glasgow East.
Complain about this comment
I will freely admit that I didnt expect to awake this morning to such positive news.
To quote the begining of thunderbirds I think it was " anything can happen in the next half hour"
@2
Pat you missed the scenario where he hangs on and no one is mad enough to take over before the impending electoral defeat.
If you go back to 97 there wasnt a tory to be found who was going to challenge Major because defeat was already assured. They certainly didnt expect to be behind for 11 years either so the wise money was to hang on and kick the leader once he had lost.
It was a great move by Parnell, who was openly against Brown a few months ago to come in with a stealth policy announcement that ensures Brown ultimate defeat. There truly is now no recovering from this body blow.
This is just political history repeating itself with one exception Major managed to win one term, other than that the scenario is identical.
So long Labour see you in 15 years if you're lucky
Complain about this comment
I have just listened to part of the Gordon Brown speech to labour party activists. He is beyond belief! I am sure that when Hitler was in his bunker he was saying exactly the same. I am here to lead the country through difficult times! We can still win the victory which we so deserve. You are volunteers working for nothing.
What amazes me is that nobody any longer refers to cash for honours, loans made to the labour party, the court judgements which have found ballot fixing. Could it be that because these 'tools' are no longer available that parties which could rely on the votes are no longer getting them.
Is Gordon Brown so clearing up politics that labour will never have any power again? Were things actually far worse than anybody ever thought.
Another soldier killed in Afghanistan yet where were Gordons regrets.
Every day more shame, more disgrace, look at extraordinary rendition which Milliband had to admit to, look at torture in Guantalamo Bay, an American base in another foreign state, Cuba. What exactly are they doing in Cuba, surely measures must be taken to close the base. This is shameful and we are as complicit as anybody. Announce our complete withdrawal from Iraq, and do it now! We were always the problem and never the solution, there is evidence that since our retreat to the airbase thankfully very few soldiers have died. Proof if any was needed that so many soldiers and innocent civilians have died in vain.
Complain about this comment
Same old, same old. Brown will never accept the message that a Labour guvverment is most retrograde to our desire. He can't possibly have failed to notice that the people don't want him to 'listen' and to stay on as PM, so the only conclusion that can be drawn is that he's simply refusing to go. He seems to like the perceived authority that goes with being PM but doesn't understand that it's not enough to trot out the usual excuses and that he actually has to govern. Nobody's fooled!
The time for repeating the same old nonsense is past! Get thee behind me Gordon!
Complain about this comment
Such a dramatic result (albeit expected) yet it's reported by the BBC in such an understated way.
As for Brown's comments about listening he's clearly not hearing. It's all over GB....time to move on!
Complain about this comment
I've just seen a report on the treasury figures. Apparently, we're heading for a debt of £57bn (without the £100bn or so liabilities we got when GB nationalised Northern Rock) and it's still going up, when other western countries are tightening their belts. GB has got to stop spending money and reduce borrowing, otherwise the inflation rate will soar further and our economy will never recover.
I think the fiscal rules have got to be changed and our spending should be managed totally by an independent body, otherwise we've got buckley's chance of ever balancing the books in my lifetime.
Mr Brown is the instigator of all this mess and he should go, or be voted out as soon as possible.
Complain about this comment
How many posts will we get to before someone comes in and waves a red flag, or even the white flag of surender, either will do.
I reckon 50
Complain about this comment
Anyone know when the last time an incumbant PM lost his own seat at a General Election?
Every time we - the electorate - tell Gordon what we think of him, he just comes out again with the "we need to listen" line.
Well, clearly Gordon, you need to get a hearing aid, as each time we get a chance the message we are sending you keeps getting louder and louder. As #12 quoted, ...depart and let us have done with you...
If he stays at Number 10 then Labour have got to be in for a terrible mauling at the next election.
As unimpressed with Labour as I am, that would not be a good thing, as I believe a good and effective opposition is vital in any democracy.
Complain about this comment
Sorry chaps, but Tony Woodley, leader of the largest Union, has just said that Brown and labour are best for Britain, that there should be windfall taxes on utilities.
So we know who has the power now, don't we. The Unions are in charge again.
Complain about this comment
NewLabour have really got a lot to answer for.
Limping along with a clown for a prime minister is not what this country needs.
How many times are we going to be told that Gordon Brown is going to lead us through the difficult times? Doing what exactly? Wasting out time and money with useless legislation like 42 day detention and ID cards.
How exactly do ID cards lead us through the difficult times?
If this is showing us his vision, then I am a banana. He's shown us he's stubborn, incapable of understanding that 5.2m people lost out from the 10p tax debacle, incapable of accepting the blame the Tripartite system he set up (now "under review"). It's not even funny any more.
No real leader waited ten years for the job. And Gordon Brown is not a real leader.
Complain about this comment
Visiting several ex-pat friends in the middle-east a few weeks ago, none of them could understand why Gordon Brown is SO unpopular. As one of them pointed out, when he last lived here about 20 years ago; there used to be riots, football hooliganism, 3 million unemployed, high inflation, high interest rates and car ownership was more expensive in real terms than it is today (probably a good thing actually, as there were only about half the number of cars on the road).
Yes, Gordon's made mistakes which he should own up to, but what about the rest of us? The main reason people are feeling hard up is because they've borrowed far too much money in recent years and now that their greed is catching up with them, they want to blame anyone but themselves.
Complain about this comment
re comment 28 by Shelling out.
I agree 100 per cent. I have been saying it for weeks. Is anyone out there listening?
Deficit £57 billion this financial year is now a consensus prediction. Totally unsustainable. This is without so much "investment" of types not included. It is also with Northern Rock contingent liabilities taken on.
The Government keep in announcing new initiatives every day. New plans. New measures. They all cost.
But WHEN WHEN WHEN will the Government announce that it wil be cutting spending - and in what areas. It has no choice. It is politically horrible and an admission that the "prudence" has not been prudent - but we are all waiting.
Normally in an economic slowdown the Government spending can be a counter-balancing cushion. But not this time because we already have an unsustainable deifict. Spending has to be reduced. And very quickly. It cannot wait a couple of years. This is the harsh economic truth. The unions need to understand this too.
Complain about this comment
Browns insistence he's listening - when all available evidence is to the contrary - after each and every failure, has become repetitive to the point of it becoming a comedy catchphrase.
At least once he's booted out of Number 10 he'll have a career - albeit as a warm up act for Little and Large.
It's all getting a little odd, I thought Blairs final days had more than a little Norma Desmond about them, but Browns current divorce proceedings against reality is rapidly descending into Chris Morris material.
Complain about this comment
@28, shellingout
If you're concerned about waste I suggest looking at the recent PAC on the MoD, along with the underlying - and, sadly, mainly unreported - stories behind the recent Typhoon and aircraft carrier announcements.
It's a pity the BBC isn't more proactive on these things, especially given its reach and the fact such waste is endemic throughout all tiers of government.
At a time of such economic uncertainty and Browns insistence we all need to tighten our belts, now, more than usual, we need to have the governments fiscal obesity put under the spotlight.
Complain about this comment
33 sbusdjh
We are not in debt. We have money in the bank. We haven't borrowed other than the mortgage. We only spend what we have in the bank.
And we too are feeling squeezed. And the feeling is getting worse by the day.
Now we all know there is not much we can do about prices at the moment. The problem is we haven't any leadership from Brown. Saying "we will listen and learn" every five minutes doesn't help. Saying "I feel your pain" doesn't help.
The problem for Brown is that everyone knows he plotted to get rid of Blair for 10 years, he is vain, he doesn't leisten and doesn't learn. Put simply he is a very vain man who "cannot" be wrong whatever he does. He is a loser.
Complain about this comment
Song by Adrian Cairns, to the tune of 'Golden Brown' by The Stranglers:
Gordon Brown shows us all fun
Doing things like arresting your mum
He thinks its right
Don't need to fight
Never in town with Gordon Brown
Every time just like the last
He will mess up wasn't it fast?
Tax all the land
Steal both your hands
Constantly frown with Gordon brown
Gordon Brown oh what a mess
All our own cash is in your old vest
Go far away
Don't even stay
He'll come to your town will Gordon Brown
(Constantly frown) Constantly Frown frown (Constantly frown)
(Constantly frown) At Gordon Brown (with golden brown)
(Constantly frown) Constantly frown (Constantly frown)
(Constantly frown) At Gordon Brown (with golden brown)
(Constantly frown) Constantly frown (Constantly frown)
(Constantly frown) At Gordon Brown (with golden brown)
(Constantly frown) Constantly frown (Constantly frown)
(Constantly frown) At Gordon Brown (with golden brown)
(Constantly frown) Constantly frown (Constantly frown)
Anyone fancy a go at writing another verse?
Complain about this comment
Dagnabbit
was #33 a red flag?
It was reasonably well hidden if it was.
A bit like a magazine in a brown paper bag.
Complain about this comment
sbusdjh
It has nothing to do with over-borrowing or greed here mate. I have a small mortgage and run a very modest diesel car, which cost me nearly £70 to fill up at the garage on Wednesday. That won't last me the week getting to and from work so I'll probably have to fill up again before next Wednesday. That's £140 in the course of a week.
I also heard that electricty and gas prices will go up, electricity by 17% and gas by 22%. I grant you that not many people have their central heating on in this weather, but come Christmas a lot of people will be a lot more hard-up than they are at the moment.
As I've said before, GB had the power to stop the banks lending money, but he chose to sit back and collect the stamp duty instead. Due to his ineptitude, the greed of the banks, and the stupidity of some people who over-stretched themselves, we are now all paying for it.
I wonder how much fuel costs in the Middle East?
Complain about this comment
From the bbc report
Mr Brown said there was "a brighter future that we can build".
He added: "Have confidence that not only do we have the right policies but that when the time comes we will be able to persuade the British people."
Newsflash Gordon we have already been persuaded you're a goner
I agree there is a brighter future but it isnt red.
You do indeed have the right policies and they have persuaded massive areas of the country that you and your party have let them down over the last 11 years and that the time is right for a change in government.
And as for your 24 months comment, unless you are changing electoral law in less than 24 months you will wake up and not be in government you have 23 months maximum left unless one of your policies is to declare a national emergency in June 2010 and refuse an election.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown takes all our tax
He lies to us and twists all the facts
Though Labour is dead
He still flies the Red
He?ll never back down, mad Gordon Brown
Complain about this comment
Reading some of his speech was cringeworthy.
In view of this defeat, what does he do? He attacks Tory policy. He must be mighty fearful of his fellow Scots views of the SNP if he chose not to decry their policy of independence. Once Labour territory, Scotland is now very much its own land and the potential for independence is now greater than ever.
Gordon Brown: "Have confidence that not only do we have the right policies but that when the time comes we will be able to persuade the British people."
Des Browne: the loss had been "directly related to the cost of living" and said "we need to do more of the sorts of things that we've been doing".
So you see everyone, its not their policies at all, their policies are just perfect, not a jot wrong with them at all. It's just the cost of living, nothing else, there is no other reason whatsoever for people not to vote Labour. Cost of living right? Nothing else.
Well, I'm convinced. Honest.
Complain about this comment
Frank-Castle
I don't know quite what's happened to the Beeb. They used to give a lot of air time to serious issues but now they've been dumbed down, like everything else. I watch it first thing in the morning, but if I want more details about any topical political issues, such as the by-election in Glasgow, I watch Sky News. The coverage of such issues on the Beeb leaves a lot to be desired on some days. Sorry Nick, but it's got to be said.
Complain about this comment
@24
That was from Stingray, not Thunderbirds. My knowledge of classic TV is a lot better than my knowledge of politics!
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown, you?ve lost all our votes
Labour MPs, go get yer coats
He lost Glasgow East
But we?ll still be fleeced
We?ll never pipe down, OUT Gordon Brown!
Complain about this comment
Couldn't resist letting you know that a sanctuary for bumblebees has been set up in Perth and Kinross.
We look after our own!
Complain about this comment
@38
Brilliant!
I havent laughed so hard in ages, my cat gave itself a hernia it was guffawing so hard.
It was the "Steals both your hands line" that corpsed me
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown maybe have the ability to listen and understand although that is far from clear
The problem is its the action part
No leadership
No political drive
A prime minster and his chancellor riding on the waves of financial prosperity but the mediterrean clam has been replaced by a south atlantic gale and we are getting seasick.
Not his fault! it is as much his fault as the credit for the last ten years he keeps droning on about!
Give us an election the country wants and then retire gracefully to write your memoires and to sitting down with John Major and discussing its not your fault but my predecessors
Complain about this comment
Quote: "On polling day, the Westminster village - politicians and journalists alike - had convinced itself that Labour would just squeak home."
It seems like the Westminster Village make a habit of being out of touch i.e your comments, Nick (and others) regarding David Davis.
Personally last night was great because I had whacked £100 on a SNP win partly due to the accurate analysis on the Politicalbetting blog which showed the contest was far far closer than a lot of 'Westminster Village' journalists seemed to think.
Complain about this comment
I thought I'd post an amended (more-friendly) version of something I posted somewhere else, and that is...
When your boss is an incompetent idiot who has control over the company you work for, there are, logically speaking, only 3 possible outcomes:
1) Your company goes bankrupt
2) Your boss gets sacked
3) Your boss resigns
There are no other alternatives; your boss won't magically start enhancing the company's (or his own) fortunes when he's an incompetent idiot, it only ever gets worse until 1 of the 3 points above happens.
I don't think labour (or the BBC) have tumbled to the seriousness of any of this yet, they also don't realise that the whole party is tarnished with the same brush and all as incompetent as each other so a change of leader won't make any significant difference.
"steering us through hard times", "I'm the best man for the job", "they're telling me they all love me and everything I do", "they're telling me it's nothing to do with me and that it's all the American's fault."
They're doomed, and they'll be in the political wilderness after 2010 for over 20 years.
Complain about this comment
Lets not forget how well the Conservatives did last night by not losing any votes to the SNP. Looks like the Cameron recovery in Scotland is well underway ;o). 1200 votes well done you. a gold star for effort.
SNP probably played the Scottish oil card. An Ideal time to do so I think you'll agree.
Linking the squandering of oil resources by the Conservatives to Gordon Brown having tea with Margaret thatcher would have helped. Any Thatcher worshiping loonies out there who want to say I wish her dead can forget it. I don't.
Lets hope he's really listening. Scotland, North of England and Wales are a little fed up with the complacency of the government towards "safe seats" and look like they will no longer put up with Labour mimicking the Conservative party to pander to South East whingers because our voting system and the BBC favours them.
That Conservative yesterday. Claiming a recovery in Scotland because they didn't lose any votes to the SNP was hilarious. It really cheared me up. They stand no chance. It could be another reason the SNP won. fear of the Conservative party and their record in Scotland might have made them more ready to leave the UK.
Quite a good result in a way for those of us who think our voting system and safe seats are bad for democracy.
Complain about this comment
42 power
Like it. You should be a poet. Sums it up in five lines.
Complain about this comment
It was interesting to listen to Alistair Darling (of the poisoned chalice) on "Wurlat1". He seemed to blame the defeat on the rising cost of living which seems rather strange as Corrupted Price Index of inflation is only 3.8%. Was he by any chance suggesting that he didn't believe the Office on Fraudulent Statistics claim like the rest of us?
I do feel that MP's would have seen this coming if they weren't so wrapped up in claiming their expenses rather than having to manage on after tax income like the rest of us.
Complain about this comment
GB's only job now is to irritate the electorate by staying in office. He is undoubtedly winning that one.
In the depths of despair, gloom and incompetence hey presto! Brown goes in a spectacular coup and a newly energised Milliband steps forth sounding like Blair complete with a fresh NuLab vision to lead the country forward..
I could write the script..
Complain about this comment
51 wilko
If that's all the sollace you can get from Glasgow East so much the better.
At least Cameron visited Glasgow East unlike the cowardly Brown and Darling. 1300 votes there I would consider a triumph of sortsn since Labour have led the seat in one way or another since 1926!!!
I'm afraid that trying to knock the Conservatives and SNP is all labour are good for.
So to sum up Labour. No leader, no strategy, no policies, NO HOPE.
Complain about this comment
When Gordon Brown fails to save the country from its economic fate and he has to have an election what can we expect. The good times are just around the corner, please let me finish the job. I won't let you down.
What then, a government of national unity to save us from our fate?
If he says one more time that he feels my pain then I will scream. In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king, trouble is we are no longer blind, and Gordon is and never was a leader. I would not follow him over the top.
Gordon Brown is no action man, he has a future job alright, signing on as disabled at the employment office and being told you are quite fit for work, go get a job, that's what we are going to be told so what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
Complain about this comment
52:
Who cares how well The Conservatives did in Scotland? Talk about trying to deflect bad news. Scotland has always been a wasteland for The Tories. Nothing's going to change that. The real loser was GB. The sooner Scotland is cut loose the better! GB and AD amongst others can then be left to fend for themselves.
Complain about this comment
Aha post 52 before a real red flag waver appears, I just squeaked in there.
I'm inspired by powers posts
heres another song for Gordon
its a working class classic
Listen
Do you want to know a secret
Do you promise not tell
whoa oh oh
Closer
let me whisper in you're
say the words you need to here
You are in a stew ew ew ew ew
We've known a secret for a year or two
everyone knows it except for you
Complain about this comment
What happens next may be unpredictable, but I think we can narrow down the possibilities:
1. Gordon Brown isn't going to resign. He's wanted this job for too long to give it up now. The only way he's leaving No 10 is when he's dragged out attempting to cling on with his fingernails.
2. Nothing motivates MPs more than self-interest, and I'm sure there are plenty of MPs in marginal and even not-so-marginal seats who are now extremely worried for their nice cushy all-expenses-paid jobs, and I'd be amazed if they want Brown leading them into the next election.
3. Therefore, Brown may be forced to quit as leader sometime soon even if Labour remain in power for the next 2 years.
4. Having said that, I agree with Pot_Kettle's analysis (#24), that it's unlikely anybody else would be crazy enough to want to be party leader only to lead the party to certain defeat at the next election, so maybe Brown will get to stay after all.
So, yeah, unpredictable.
Complain about this comment
Nick I wrote earlier on Oops!,
I thought I had better repeat it here just in case someone thinks I am in hiding
"all you tory bloggers, gloat gloat gloat gloat gloat gloat ad infintum, if I were in your shoes I would too, but much of what you say I disagree with, but with you all in a state of exuberance I think it should wait for another day"
Complain about this comment
33. sbusdjh
You sort of answer your own question.
Your friends are ex pats and not here under sufferance.
Its Brown that has borrowed too much and now finds that he is in trouble. He broke up with prundence and she ran off with a trillon pounds.
But do let your friends know they are welcome back here any time. And ask them to bring as much of that 1 quid a gallon petrol as they can carry.
Ill meet them at the airport.
Complain about this comment
@52
It really doesnt matter whether the Conservatives win in Scotland, the fact that labour wont win there come 2010 and wont win in Wales come 2010 effectively banishes them from power in the union.
Labours only hope for power now is if the SNP manage to carry the vote for independance and then they return to power in Scotland.
I've a feeling Plaid will tie up Wales, the SNP will tie up Scotland. Conservatives will tie up england with a few inner city areas staying red due to the "My father voted red" factor.
Its a little sad for a Union that got us through some tough times but Labours shambolic devolution policy leaving England with no parliament and failing to deal with the West Lothian question have brought us to this
Complain about this comment
power-to-the-ppl
How about this one..
Labour's done, can't take the heat
SNP have taken their seat
Curran's got up
Mason's sat down
Never a frown
Unlike Gordon Brown
Complain about this comment
Carrotts
Petrol is £1 a gallon in the Middle-East eh?
No wonder sbusdjh's friends are out there and not here.
Complain about this comment
Now the leaders of the GMB union is demanding a leadership challenge.
It seems the unions are already starting to try and strongarm the government and would doubtlessly like a leader more to their liking.
This is pretty much why I can't stand the modern unions, they're supposed to stand for their workers, not play politics.
By all means fight for fair pay and equal rights, but trying to foist their own political aspirations on the nation is ridiculous. We have enough self-aggrandizing jackasses in politcs without the tinpot Stalins joining in.
Complain about this comment
OOoooh
Some more bad news that auntie beeb nearly buried but I found it
Dave Rowntree, the drummer with indie band Blur, has lost his bid to become a London councillor.
The 43-year-old Labour supporter was beaten by Conservative rival Mehfuz Ahmed for the Church Street seat in a Westminster City Council by-election.
It was the first time the traditional Labour stronghold returned a Tory.
Complain about this comment
I think that Gordon Brown is now in a very tight corner.
Labour Party sponsorship is now 'owned' by the Trade Unions and thay are already putting forward 100 'socialist' proposals which will inevitably cost the country more money.
Gordon Brown is already scheming to derestrict his own fiscal limits on public borrowing knowing there is a shortfall in tax income at this time.
If he stays the Labour Party will make a slight less worse hash of the public finances; if he goes the Labour agenda will inevitably swing towards the dictates of the trades unions.
Either way, after the next election there will be a massive hole in public finances and the Geneeral Election will have become a poison chalice for the next government.
On a personal note, I was a member of the Labour Party but have resigned as I do not believe that the Labour Party govern in the interests of the United Kingdom. If they bow to the Trade Unions 100 agenda items list, my disillusionment will be complete!
Complain about this comment
What a ridiculous speech from the great Ditherer to the Trades Unions.
He doesn't want to wake up in 2010 to school and hospital closures and tax cuts for the rich?
Has he been smoking something? Do we just go on spending more and more on health and education without getting any measurable improvement?
Tax cuts are not even on the agenda thanks to Gordon Brown's profligate ways. All people are asking for is an end to endless tinkering with the tax system and blatant abuses of 'green' taxation. Where is all this money going that we pay on green taxes? Where are the wind farms and nuclear power stations.
What people don't want to wake up to is this man robbing them day after day and bleating about the awful international situation. He's broken record.
Complain about this comment
48 pot kettle, As my old mum used to say "simple things please simple minds".
Complain about this comment
re: 59 and 64
It's funny because it's true.
Complain about this comment
Why is it that the news continues to be reported by the BBC from Brown's point of view? Reporters and commentators, you must know that this ship is sinking. Start looking to the future and the policy makers for the next decade.
Complain about this comment
@70
ta for the personal attack that you profess never to commit
Complain about this comment
re: 69
"Do we just go on spending more and more on health and education without getting any measurable improvement?"
It would seem so. Every Labour supporter knows that the only way to improve things is to measure them constantly. I take it they have never heard the phrase 'a watched pot never boils.' It's simple: what they ought to do is scrap all this pointless testing, the only reason it exists in the first place is to (a) employ even more bureaucrats ie. massage employment statistics, (b) make it easier to fudge the education statistics, and (c) make it appear to the press as if they know what they're doing. We could easily replace our MPs with crash test dummies and no-one would ever know.
Complain about this comment
4. Having said that, I agree with Pot_Kettle's analysis (#24), that it's unlikely anybody else would be crazy enough to want to be party leader only to lead the party to certain defeat at the next election, so maybe Brown will get to stay after all.
I have to agree with that analogy. the only danger is that by waiting for a miracle that never comes they might be out of a seat in 2010 anyway.
Maybe be a stalking house, force a leadership when one of the lesser lights (balls, milliband) can run without appearing disloyal and then they go into an election when anything less than a total massacre a la 1997 for the tories will be seen as good work and that brown was the real architect as both chancellor and prime minister
Complain about this comment
33 and 37
Good points.
People only comment here when they are unhappy. If (and probably when) Dave gets in, the only people commenting will be anti-Tory.
Some of the problems are nothing to do with GB but I really want to see leadership. I was surprised when his response was "listen and understand" - he said this months ago. So has he not been listening or has he not understood?
Labour sought the marginal seats to get into power and since coming to power, has continued to do so - ignoring the so-called safe seats. They can't do that now.
The right policies, right now, are curbing the higher prices - whatever that takes. I'm not talking about houses but food and energy.
Complain about this comment
61:
A graceful retreat indeed. Very wise in the circumstances!
Complain about this comment
What research can uncover!
On the wonderful internet you have access to the Foreign Relations, 1969-1976, Vol E-8 Documents on South East Asia, 1973-1976 of the US Department of State. Why is this interesting in the context of the disaster which is Gordon Brown, because it refers to the situation of Diego Garcia, which is where suspects were transferred to as admitted to by Mr Milliband, our illustrious Foreign Secretary.
I could copy you the whole document but I refer to article 3 and this I will quote in full:
'Although they invisage the agreement on Diego Garcia as a confidential diplomatic exchange, the Ministers expect the the existance of that agreement to become public. This could evoke adverse reactions from the soviets, the Indian Ocean littoral states, and the Arabs. The latter might conclude that the presence of US forces was directed at them presenting an obvious and serious risk to the possibility of the situation in the area. The Ministers are therefore interested in coordinating with the US the way the Diego Garcia matter is presented publicly in both countries'.
Now that initself is quite interesting, well it is to me anyway so read on to Article 6:
'The agreement itself should be a confidential exchange of diplomatic instruments but with both sides acknowledging its existence. The agreement, among other things, would provde for the operation and joint use of Diego Garcia facilities in exactly the same way as US bases in the United Kingdom are covered. This would mean that HMG would be able to assure parliament that Diego Garcia remains UK sovereign territory'.
Now, with the admission by Milliband you wonder why some of us are appalled at our complicity in extraordinary rendition. America has fractured the agreement and accordingly it must be withdrawn with immediate effect and all American forces withdrawn. Now, if we were to act like men instead of mice then I may, just may, begin to support our pathetic Prime Minister. Show some back bone Brown and kick out the Americans from our sovereign territory.
Complain about this comment
power-to-the-ppl
"We could easily replace our MPs with crash test dummies and no-one will ever know"
At least we'd get more sense out of a crash test dummy.
Complain about this comment
re: 72
It is odd isn't it? I always thought Nick was a Tory, but there's undoubtably Labour bias there at times. Perhaps a Labour troll always stands next to him when he reports, just out of shot, with a gun to his back. Wouldn't be surprising given the current situation!
Complain about this comment
Reading in yesterdays paper about the happy or unhappy after Glasgow get together with Labour and the unions, it comments that the unions will withhold founding if certain policies are not put forward. Is this not the same as cash for questions but far more blatant.
Can some one out there enlighten me as to the legality of this.
Complain about this comment
On another point -
I don't think we'll see any party support a pact on leadership in the future. I think we have seen enough problems. Leadership elections from now on.
Complain about this comment
My friends in the middle east don't pay any tax and yes petrol is very cheap. But there is no free education, no democracy and if and when they get seriously ill they freely admit they'll be on the first plane back to Blighty.
Hard to believe for some of you I know, but we are still, on average, more affluent than we were 20 years ago, when Mrs Thatcher was still popular enough to have won a 3rd term in office.
The big failure of Labour has been to allow the gap between rich and poor to widen. Brown should have the courage to introduce a 50p tax rate for anyone on a 6 figure salary.
Let's give the electorate a proper ideological choice again and force the Tories to show their hand.
Complain about this comment
I like the expression on The SNP winners face as Margaret Curran is speaking. Classic!
Complain about this comment
@75
I think Brian Taylor's blog sums it up nicely.
If Labour were to oust Gordon they would have their third leader in one parliamentary term making their position untenable and it would be unprecedented.
I dont think there is anything constitutionally that can stop them doing that however and surely something would need to be put on the statute books to cover such an evetuality in the future.
I think we are living in interesting times.
The Union now looks creakier than it ever has.
All the partys now need to look at what they are going to do when the Scots declare independance, they are likely to be followed closely by the Welsh, the only reason they dont make more noise about it now i because Labour are in power.
There will be loud shouts for an English assembly
Complain about this comment
re: 79
And a lot more value for money! (And no lies).
Complain about this comment
What speech today?
More tractor production figures.
Labour members must be tearing their hair out!
Complain about this comment
Has anyone got the courage to tell Gordon the game is up? I seriously doubt it. Most Labour MP's will keep their snouts in the trough till the electorate call time.
The next 18 months or so will be about feathering nests outside the Houses of Parliament.
Are there enough nests to go around, there's going to be a lot of Labour MP's losing their seats?
Have the BBC got enough cameras for all the Ministers who are going to have their own "Portillo moment" at the next General Election. It will be with deep satisfaction to watch Labour getting a dose of its own medecine, and richly deserved it will be.
Complain about this comment
If Scotland did split I wouldn't blame them. They must be seriously fed up with the Westminster government pandering to merchant bankers and white van man in the South East of England.
I suppose it doesn't really matter if Scotland splits from the UK. We are all part of the European family now. I doubt if Cameron will do anything about that. He is just humouring the xenophobics to get their vote. Best to just embrace the future rather than complain about it.
I don't think if Scotland leaves the UK we will be left with a 1 party conservative system. The boundaries would need to be changed and maybe the voting system. So I wouldn't be too hopeful about it.
Complain about this comment
re: 77
Yeah I think grandantidote and the rest of the Reds are taking time to regroup and plan their next comments carefully. I can imagine them poring over every dodgy statistic, typing and clicking so fast that smoke is coming out of the backs of their computers and saying to themselves 'must...justify...Glasgow...East...! Damn..those...Tory...bloggers!'
Complain about this comment
Speaking without notes or a lectern, as seems to be the fashion these days, the prime minister made only fleeting reference to that humiliating defeat, praising the Labour candidate, Margaret Curran, and thanking her for her valiant efforts on his behalf.
But that was it. The elephant in the room was given a curt nod and then pointedly ignored.
Nice to know he was listening and learning.
@83
Its exactly those policies (Tax the richer than me) that have lead to the gap in the first place. As Labour have taken more in tax from the more affluent those people havent been able to spend as they wanted and so the lower end of the economy suffers. By making the poorer rely on handouts rather than bettering themselves they have remained static, due in part to the fact that so much of the tax take is wasted it doesnt benefit those that it is meant to.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Serious question,
If Gordo goes, and the Labour have their third leader in a single term of govenrment, surely the case for an immediate election would be unarguable.
The problem is of course, that the Labour party are, as I understand it, flat broke, and couldn't afford to fight an election.
What then?
Complain about this comment
sbusdjh
Granted, some people are more affluent than they were 20 years ago, but when I see a large chunk of my hard-earned pay being eaten up at the petrol station every month, it's hard to believe.
We are not well-off by any stretch but we can manage on what we earn. There used to be some money left over in our bank accounts at the end of each month (particularly since our sons left home!), but even that is dwindling now.
My mother and mother-in-law are both state pensioners. We could afford to help them out now and again but even that will be a thing of the past soon.
What I mean to say is that the majority of people don't want handouts, they just want to be able to live a reasonable life in this country on the wages they earn. Surely that's not too much to ask now, is it?
At least your friends can earn their salaries tax free, and if and when they decide to come back to the UK it will be on their terms. We don't have a choice here - we either like it or lump it!
Complain about this comment
The Labour Party needs to face up to the fact that Gordon Brown is a liability and if they stick with him until the next election they will lose on the same scale as the Tories did in 1997 and then be faced with opposition politics for at least two terms. Cameron is certainly not perfect but he has significantly more credibility than Brown.
Labour?s only hope is to dump the incumbent (health grounds would be a neutral explanation) and give Charles Clark or David Blunkett 18 months to turn things around. At the very least they could limit the Tories victory in 2010 to under 50 seats thus giving Labour chance to win power back in 2014/15. Sticking with Brown will pretty much guarantee a Tory majority until 2020 and beyond if the SNP wins its independence vote.
To survive Labour (whether old or new) must think beyond Brown. He is a nice, honest and honourable guy but he IS NOT PM material and never was hence Mandleson?s backing of Blair in 1994. Labour Party please WAKE UP!
Complain about this comment
@83, sbusdjh
Why punish those earning 6 figures? That going to include the very GPs your friends fly over to see?
If Brown wanted to reduce the gap between rich and poor he'd reduce taxes on longer hours and second jobs, increase availability of evening and weekend classes for people to improve their skills and introduce adult apprenticeships.
I know its very British to want to punish those doing better than yourself, but why not try thinking of actual useful solutions beyond throwing cash at a problem?
With benefits and the public sector we're so far past the point of diminishing returns, and we need to look at feasible actions, not decades old failed mantras.
Complain about this comment
83, sbusdjh
Great idea, lets increase tax.
You should be a government minister.
Complain about this comment
Pot-kettle
Are you seriously suggesting the rich have been short of cash in recent years? Look at the conspicuous consumption of luxury cars and second homes. That's definitely up. I've no objection to people making money, but how does this kind of selfish spendfest benefit the poor? It's time to restore some fairness to the tax system.
Shellingout
I sincerely hope your mother and mother-in-law do prosper as pensioners under a Tory government. But don't hold your breath.
Complain about this comment
Re #10 Blogpolice
"The only problem is that Nats have got it sussed. With what little Labour talent there is located in Westminster, Labour's C team left in Scotland don't look too good against Alex Salmond (the SNP don't have anyone else of note)."
Replace the C team with Gordon's B team and independence in 2010 becomes certain.
Complain about this comment
I noticed that the betting exchanges predicted this by-election more accurately than the pundits. Now that William Hill has GB odds on to be dumped before the next election perhaps we should turn our attention to who should succeed him.
The only one I can imagine voting for is Charles Clarke - but he has made too many enemies I suspect to stand a chance. Balls, Purnell, Burnham and Straw would all be electoral suicide. Miliband might do okay but he would be insane to take it now - if it happens it will be an old man in a hurry.
Complain about this comment
re: 97
The only way to restore fairness to the tax system is to have a flat percentage for everyone.
Complain about this comment
@97
No I am suggesting that.
The reasonably well off ( the ones that pay taxes because they dont pay accountants to avoid them) Have been stealth taxed until they dont have the money to distribute by spending,
That spending is real economic growth. Not spending tax money creating government beauracracy that isnt wealth creating.
The 2 Million people that labour have taken from the jobless have almost exclusively been given non wealth creating governmental jobs. A third of what these people are paid goes directly to paying thier colleagues.
Those people that labour have neglected that have to rely on benefits have pretty much been left standing still.
The wealth gap we now have is in essence the difference between those left on purely benefits and those that Labour directly employ.
All the rest have got on and bettered themselves and hence their earnings are higher but they have less disposable income due to the tax and waste policies of the government.
If the measurement actually measured the disposable income of both groups the gap is nothing like as wide due again to the taxation policy of the governement.
Complain about this comment
@sbusdjh, 97
"It's time to restore some fairness to the tax system."
So a flat tax then? After all, fairness and equality demand we treat all equally, right?
Or are you more interested in an *unfair* tax system that redistributes wealth?
There is nothing fair or equitable about taking what is person A's and giving some of it to person B - there are arguments for it, some very good arguments, but don't for a moment claim fairness.
Complain about this comment
No More Tory Booom and Bust
Gordon sat Canute like, convinced his willpower could stop the moons gravitiational forces
Complain about this comment
Re #31 mikepko
Beer and sandwiches at No.10 just like the good old days of the '70s except no smoke-filled rooms now that the health Nazis have banned it in places of employment.
Wonder what Wilson and Callaghan (no extra tax on pipe tobacco) would have thought?
Complain about this comment
re: 89 dhwilkinson
Regarding potential boundary changes; that's an interesting subject, because on labourhome a lot of people who realise they're all in political trouble are currently saying things like "the recent boundary changes won't help us as much this time as they did last time when it comes to getting more votes" (a very telling comment/observation on the labour approach generally)
re: 83 sbusdjh
The trick is not to make the rich poorer, but to make the poor richer. It's not an either/or situation; you can make the poor richer while also not stinging the rich if you run the economy properly.
That's what labour don't understand, and that's why they're in so much trouble, and that's why the economy is in so much trouble.
Stinging the rich is counter productive. Labour don't like the idea but the truth is that without the rich, there are no jobs for the poor because generally it's the rich who create the businesses and the jobs that allow everyone else to survive.
All government money is essentially got from private individuals and businesses (ie the rich), if you eliminate the rich then you also eliminate their business income (as they'll all go abroad) and hence all the tax revenue disappears.
Get rid of the rich and the poor will starve.
Brown/Labour don't understand basic economics, so they've been stinging both the rich and the poor and pouring all the money down the toilet; they've finally been tumbled.
Complain about this comment
I'm wondering what others think of a potential Scottish independence?
Once I was dead against the break-up of the Union, but with visiting Scotland several times a year for the last few years I've changed my mind - their passion, pride and patriotism is deserving of independence. I compare and contrast it with the English equivalent, and I find myself shamed.
Scottish independence might be bad for Britain, but I think the Scots would do fine on their own and indeed prosper.
If its what the Scots want, I hope they get it and shame Westminster with their success.
Complain about this comment
Re #43 Frank-Castle
Spot on.
As Brecht advised the East German regime, his only hope is to change the people.
Complain about this comment
I wonder why no has yet mention that the 555 people who voted for the other Curran lady clearly misread the ballot papers and there should be a re-election with at least one of the Currans removed.
We all know that its an easy mistake to make particularly in an area of low literacy
Complain about this comment
HAHA
my post 103 was meant for another blog.
I tried to get it removed but its staying as it doesnt contravene rules.
I'll apologise here for being way off topic the post was meant for the Magazine Friday fun
Complain about this comment
108
Nonsense. Youre just clutching at straws.
Complain about this comment
#106 - Frank-Castle
I still favour a federal system but if Scottish independence serves to restore some of the rights of the English, it's fine with me. And if it's what the Scots want, I would be the last person to oppose them.
Complain about this comment
Re #52 dhwilkinson
"Quite a good result in a way for those of us who think our voting system and safe seats are bad for democracy."
I'm glad I can agree with you for once, but that's hardly a view prevalent in NuLabour.
Bliar came into office promising such things, which might have saved him from committing some of his bigger idiocies. Brown will be dragged out of office soon as he has no conception of sharing anything.
If they wait until the general election, then Labour will sink with him. Harperson, Milliband and most of the others "in the frame" to replace him have no chance of holding back the tide, either.
About the only scenario I can think of where Labour might save something from the train-wreck would be for Straw to take over as caretaker, pushing back the anti-civil liverties agenda and signing a solemn covenant on electoral reform and the completion of devolution (preferably in Blood with QE2 as witness). He might then have some chance at an early general election of wrongfooting the Tories and forming a coalition with the LibDems.
Pretty much any other result will push Scotland into independence, with Wales following and leaving Cameron as PM of a UK consisting of England and Northern Ireland for as long as the Unionists can stave off re-unification with the Republic.
PS: As I've said before, I regard Straw as leastworst in much the same way as I regard Speer as the leastworst of those convicted at Nuremburg.
Complain about this comment
sbusdjh
I doubt anyone on a state pension will prosper under any government, Labour, Conservative or Lib-Dem.
Complain about this comment
re: 105
Spot on.
Complain about this comment
Gordon the Golem clearly believes the electorate are as stupid as he is by loudly hailing his forthcoming "tax cut" that'll put another £120 into peoples' pockets. Does he think no one remembers that this "tax cut" is just a one-year fix to his abolition of the 10p tax band?
Complain about this comment
I was astounded to hear Gordon Brown re-writing history claiming 11 years of economic growth, conveniently forgetting the growth during the period before labour.
He does the same claiming inflation is lower, when in reality it has been higher for the last 15 months than during the whole of the last 4 years of Tory government.
Complain about this comment
I do sincerely hope that if the conservatives win the next GE, they will disestablish the BBC, and free us long suffering viewers from paying the now notorious license fee.
And Nick: get a life! :)
Complain about this comment
As one of the few people trying to get some balance here, it would be nice if my last 3 comments could have got through. Is there an anti-left filter on this?!
Complain about this comment
Where to now? Here is an idea.....!!!
5 independent Nations (inside, for my preference, or outside, the EU) and abolish the Westminster parliament. (5 = Up North, Down South, Scotland, Northern Eire and Wales.) Run their own affairs; collect their own taxes; pay their own bills. (Wage their own wars!!!!)
England split in two - an independent parliament at Winchester for the South and in York for the North, etc.. No more that 5 dozen MPs in each. Above all no more Westminster!
Well, what do the complainers want? A totally policy-less, inexperienced Etonian who's only claim to fame is that he apparently/reportedly helped us with our humiliating exit from the ERM perhaps?
Gordon please come up with some ideas!
Complain about this comment
#112 Brownedov
QE2? "How can there be a Liz the twa, when the first yin's never been?"
Complain about this comment
What exactly does it take to get a message onto this blog? Forget moderation which I've never undergone - are there some key words that simply allow a posting to get through?
Complain about this comment
Whilst it is interesting that a lot of people compare the current position of Gordon Brown to that of John Major in the 1990s, it is arguable that in this case history is not repeating itself...
The main problem (for a lot of the electorate) by 1990 was Thatcher herself, rather than Conservatism and Conservative Party policies - the notable exception being the hated Poll Tax. Thatcher was forced out as PM for a combination of reasons; the Poll Tax, the resignations of key Ministers and deep divisions within the Conservative Party about the EEC (now EU.) Once Thatcher was dumped in favour of Major the poll ratings of the Conservatives lept by 10%. What is often forgotten is that Major was for a short while a very popular PM (as his majority in his Huntingdonshire constitutency in 1992 demonstrates) and at one point was the most popular PM since Winston Churchill (incredible to believe but it was true.) As we all know, Major, contrary to perceived wisdom at the time, went on to win the General Election in 1992 with a 21 seat majority.
In contrast to this, Tony Blair was arguably forced out by Gordon Brown for entirely different reasons. Unlike Thatcher, Blair's position had not become untenable and last year it was unlikely that Blair would have lost a General Election by a landslide. Whilst opinion was divided on the Iraq War (and still is), it is arguable that this issue would be less important at a General Election in 2010. Moreover, the current economic problems were unseen in 2007 - in 1990, it was clear that the UK was heading towards a deep recession. Similarly, Blair was personally popular and in a deep contrast to Thatcher (and Brown) was 'liked' by the electorate.
Blair was not deposed for the same reasons as Thatcher and this is where Brown's problem lies. Switching Blair for Brown hasn't really done a lot for the Labour Party in the eyes of the electorate - whilst Brown had a brief honeymoon, he has been found out too quickly (Major would not be until after 1992 - probably Black Wednesday I would guess) and his reputation will suffer from thereon.
Thatcher is quoted as saying New Labour was one of her greatest successes, and it is arguable that in the current climate the New Labour project of 'Umbrella Politics' and Third Ways is in ruins (if not dead completely.) New Labour worked so well because it combined the 'best' bits of Labour and Conservative policies and appealed to all sides of the electorate - look at right-leaning newspapers in 1997 suggesting disgruntled Tories and Lib Dems should vote New Labour. This project depended on Blair to work - Major merely replaced Thatcher and carried on with her policies.
Brown is not Blair, the same as Major was not Thatcher. Both parties discarded vote-winners - the Tories suffered an agonising death between 1992-1997, Labour appear to be doing so now.
Complain about this comment
This confirms that Labour are finished. In the last GE turn-out in this seat was 46%, for this by-election 42%.
This wasn't Labour core voters staying at home and this wasn't SNP getting their voters out. This was Labour's traditional rock-solid core support voting for another party - in a seat where the Labour vote is passed on genetically through the generations.
If (when) Labour lose the next election, Scotland will vote for independence - not because the majority support it, but because the majority of Scots will vote against being ruled by tories in London.
Without those Scottish Labour seats, Labour will never win an election ever again.
Wake up Gordon, you aren't just destroying the Labour party, you are in danger of destroying the UK.
Complain about this comment
You say that what follows next will be 'completely unpredictable'.
Not so. What will happen is that Labour will fail again to get rid of the wrong leader and they will soldier on into defeat after two more years of embarrassing blunders, fiascos and disasters. and then be deemed unelectable for a further decade at least. That is the most likely scenario. Remember this was the party that, without any outside coercion, elected Michael Foot to lead them into an election...
The problem with Mr Brown is that he is the most 'out of touch' politician in living memory. I have the feeling, moreover, that the likes of Baldwin and Macmillan from an even earlier age managed more genuine connection than GB, who seems happy to make early morning phone calls to startled and no doubt very annoyed voters but refuses to show up to support his own party's candidate in a vital by-election and be quizzed by real, and rather angry, electors.
Personality IS a political issue and, while the failings of the government abound making them unpopular, his personality is not doing any favours for his party. He cannot continue to be the face of that party or of this government.
Oh, and will someone please tell him that the last thing we all want him to do is to 'get on with the job'?
Complain about this comment
My guess is that this was merely a protest vote against Labour, and come the next election this will return to Labour (whether or not it should is another question entirely).
However once again Brown has managed to alienate his core vote.
If I was a gambling man, I think the only bet now is when he goes rather than if.
How low can he go?
Complain about this comment
#122
Spot on but with one omission. Major's victory in 1992 was more to do with voter distrust of Kinnock than genuine support for the Tories (Neil was the man who actually made New Labour and the 1997 landslide possible but never got the recognition he deserved).
This will not be the case in 2010 as Cameron is more acceptable to the electorate than Kinnock and Brown is more distasteful than Major. We might not like it but it is fact!
Complain about this comment
Re #120 oldnat
A fair cop, guv
Complain about this comment
Earthquake duly delivered - watch the Westminster Labour Establishment rocking on the edge of an abyss.
Complain about this comment
#24
Think you're seeing things from the viewpoint of those of us sane enough to remain outside the Westminster goldfish bowl, Pot.
I dont think any professional politico would throw up the chance to become Prime Minister, however short the tenure of office, if he/she thought there was a reasonable chance of getting it... think of the alternative... to pass over the chance and wait, perhaps a decade or longer until your party gets back into power to try again ? .. by which time it would be far too late ... No, I suspect that come the autumn, the usual suspects will be jostling to get the plum job.
Complain about this comment
Re #123 Red Lenin
48% at the GE, but otherwise agree.
46% was what BBC Newsnight reported anecdotally at the beginning of the count. If they'd reached that, NuLabour would almost certainly have just sneaked over the line, but your point very much still stands.
Complain about this comment
I don't think this is a protest vote. If it was, it was a high risk strategy. Glasgow-East was one of Labour's safest seats in Scotland and they lost it in spectacular fashion to the SNP. Until the late 1980s the Tories did well in Scotland - look at their position in Scotland now...
Complain about this comment
Red Lenin @123 warns about the breakup of the UK, adding "Without those Scottish Labour seats, Labour will never win an election ever again".
Nice to know that every cloud has a silver lining.
Complain about this comment
The comments on this blog make for very depressing reading sometimes, particularly the unrestrained glee / bile directed at the government.
I am no fan of NuLab but it isn't hard to see that the cycle of govenment is just repeating itself over and over. Cast your mind forward ten, twenty, fifty, five hundred years from now, are we really just going to settle for the same old same old?
the general discusion needs to turn from "fed up of this shower of idiots, let's vote the other shower of idiots in instead" to actually looking at where the (clearly flawed) system itself is going wrong.
Complain about this comment
Re #133 DrVonSchtein
After all the lies and spin, what else could you expect and how can we trust any one of them when their actions belie their words? I hated the Thatcher government for what they did, but despise this load of charlatans for both their actions and their weasel words.
However, I totally agree with your last para that unless the system is changed there is no hope of ending this adversarial process where even all questions are treated as attacks and responded to with attacking questions rather than answers.
That will probably not apply to Scotland after the next general election because if the Tories win it will most likely drive the Scots into independence, and the Welsh will not be far behind, leaving England alone using the quasi-democratic 1872 voting system ad infinitum with a built-in Tory majority. Perhaps Cameron thinks breaking the union is a small price to pay for another 18 years of Tory misrule.
Complain about this comment
Re #134
Your final sentence is inappropriate. It is not Cameron that is threatening the Union but Brown and the wider Labour Party. This was always the risk in pushing through devolution despite the majority of Scots not voting for it in 1997.
Complain about this comment
129 pat
I agree. It would be worth becoming PM for a couple of weeks if only for the pension, the loss of seat payment and the knighthood.
I'd certainly do it, mercenary as I am!!!
Complain about this comment
Re #135 philward99
Arguably I should have put the "18 years of Tory misrule" in my last sentence in quotes as it was a Labour warcry in '97 but it strikes me as perfectly appropriate. Please explain in what way it is inappropriate and what Cameron is doing or saying to prevent the union breaking.
Labour's error was not in devolving powers but in doing so asymmetrically.
You will find very few in Scotland wanting to roll the clock back and the SNP would be very happy to make the 2010 referendum a multi-choice one with "direct rule from Westminster" as one of the options. I don't think it would receive many first preferences, or 2nds, 3rd or 4ths come to that. Glasgow East was not a referendum on independence, but rather supports the commonly held view that the centre-left Holyrood SNP minority government is gaining popularity while the right-wing Westminster NuLabour government has lost the plot amongst its core supporters.
An astute NuLabour politician (if that's not an oxymoron) who replaced Brown could offer completion of devolution and electoral reform to tempt the LibDems and possibly avoid annihilation in 2010 or Cameron could do the same to save the union.
Complain about this comment
Mr.Brown will not go, he will continue to see through "his" British/EU vision.
The Arrogance and deafness from the Labour Cabinet is astonishing. Who do they think they are?
Brown and NULabour you must go, no to "calm down" comments and "hes the best man for the job", its not going to convince the British people.
Do they actually believe that we are stupid, dumb, and forgetful?
GET REAL, Labour will never recover from this, no matter what they try to do.
If we dont get any results, and they continue to ignore us, i honestly cannot see the public waiting for the next election, do we have to go to number 10 and drag him out by his ears?
Complain about this comment
138 browndov are you encouraging insurrection, be very careful my friend or you could find yourself behind bars for forty two days.
You see you seem to think and like a number of others on here that because you say you dont want Gordon Brown he has to go, even as you say dragged out by his ears. Has democracy suddenly been thrown aside by you people, Gordon Brown has been democratically elected by the people of this country, you may not like that, I do, and there are millions like me, I think there are probably millions of conservatives who would not go along with what you think is a good idea, what would be a good idea is for you to climb down of your soapbox and wait until the country has the opportunity to vote for what the electorate feel.
It does't do your credibility any good to make absurd remarks like the following.
"If we dont get any results, and they continue to ignore us, i honestly cannot see the public waiting for the next election, do we have to go to number 10 and drag him out by his ears?",
One last thing who is us, and who gave us the power to suggest overturning the legitimate goverment does that mean that you have been elected to speak on behalf of the us, or is it as I suspect you are only speaking for your self and advocating the destruction of the democracy of the country I love
Complain about this comment
139 grandantidote wrote:
"Gordon Brown has been democratically elected by the people of this country"
you have your opinion, others have different opinions. The vast majority of people know that Brown was not democratically elected either by the public or even by his own colleagues. There was no election. There was a coup.
Complain about this comment
Re 139 grandantidote
"138 browndov are you encouraging insurrection"
I hope your rant is at Brownhas2eyes' #138 and not my sweetly reasonable #137.
I do indeed hope that the sick and wounded creature inhabiting No.10 is soon removed from office, but only in a perfectly constutional way (if that is not an oxymoron in the UK).
Most likely it will happen soon in the old-fashioned way of a (metaphorical) dagger in the back from a colleague, but if he leaves it too much longer it may be by the men (or Harpersons) in white coats.
NO Prime Minister has EVER "been democratically elected by the people of this country" because the UK system is a quasi-democratic plurality system where individual MPs are elected and they "choose" the PM.
No party in government outwith coalition since the Tories in 1900 has received 50% of the "national" vote. Yes, democracy of a sort.
More importantly, Brown is the first PM to become so without public election by his party since Douglas-Home. He has not even contrived to have a vote of confidence in the House of Cards to demonstrate his acceptability to his own "lobby fodder". He simply has no democratic legitimacy whatsoever outside his own constituency of Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath.
That said, I do not propose removing him by a manner outwith our stupid, illogical, unwritten excuse for a constitution.
Complain about this comment
130:
I doubt he was speaking literally. The bobbies outside No 10 would soon have him consigned to the clink. He was speaking with tongue in cheek, rather disrespectfully I grant you but that is probably borne out of the frustration of seeing a weak advocate clinging on to power while the walls around him are slowly crumbling.
Complain about this comment
Re #142 waldorf29
Sorry, but I don't follow who the "he" could be in my #130.
We all make errors, but it would be much easier to identify the posts you're referring to if you put the login next to the number.
Complain about this comment
143:
Sorry. Meant 139 not 130.
Complain about this comment
141 Browndov Do you see anywere in my post that he was democraticly elected as Prime Minister,
As for the continuous claims that he was not elected by his party, they are as ridiculous as those that make them, if a collection of people agree to elect a leader in any walk of life and there is only one person who puts his name in the hat then he is elected, for goodness sake you people grow up your acting like children, if you dont like GB then thats fair enough but stop this childish nonsense.
there is no glory for you although you might think so in calling GB "a sick and wounded creature inhabiting number ten.
You dont have to tell me that no Prime Minister has ever been elected by the people, I have been trying to tell people on these blogs for months as I have just told you, you once again say he has no democratic legitimacy whatsoever, for goodness sake Browndov come to your senses if he had no legitimacy then he wouldn't be there have you got some strange idea in your head that any MP can walk into the house of commons and say OK lads I'm the new prime minister. is that what you think, ? he'd be out through the door like a flash.
Not that it means much today but he is considered to be the PM by HM and by the opposition.
we have no constitution but if you want one go and lobby your MP to get you one until then we abide by the system we have regardless of what you think about it.
Complain about this comment
142 Waldorf being frustrated doesn't grant you permission to be downright rude and subversive.
Complain about this comment
re: 145 grandantidote
"As for the continuous claims that he was not elected by his party, they are as ridiculous as those that make them"
Please bear in mind that virtually everyone in the country apart from a handful of die-hard Brown fanatics believe that he was not elected, and that he simply bullied/threatened/bribed his way into number 10 without a single vote being cast. Being the only person up for a "vote" is not an election.
If you think that that claim/belief is ridiculous then you're labelling almost everyone in the country as being ridiculous.
By all means explain why you believe he was democratically elected, but please listen to the overwhelming majority who explain the other view.
"I was elected unopposed"
"well, if it was unopposed, you weren't elected mate."
Complain about this comment
#10
I agree that there are too many layers of Government and the people of Scotland are agreeing with you, more every day.
The Scots will eventually remove the Westminster layer from their heads!
I keep asking myself if Scotland is so dependant on the genorosity of the "English" (M Thatcher) and are so much in need of tuition and subsidy why are they so loathe to cut them loose?
Rearrange these words into a well known phrase or saying
Oil
Its
Stupid
The
All answers please in plain brown envelopes to contain not more that £995 and preferably in used notes.
Unionist politicians, heads in sand?
You could't make it up
Better think about cancelling the two aircraft carriers and the son of Triden pretty soon to avoid huge cancelation fees.
The coffers are bare and nothing Gordon or Dave Cameron can or will be able to do about.
Start conserving electricity now and sell everything you have to the French, Spanish, Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Indians and Yankees because you will need their cash.
Oops I forgot, Gordon has started doing that already! Anything left than can be pawned. No, not even the Gold Reserves.
What about the Monarchy? I suspect the Queen will take up fultime residence in Balmoral.
Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Complain about this comment
135. At 08:46am on 26 Jul 2008, philward99 wrote:
Re #134
"Your final sentence is inappropriate. It is not Cameron that is threatening the Union but Brown and the wider Labour Party. This was always the risk in pushing through devolution despite the majority of Scots not voting for it in 1997."
Can you please justify the statement that the devolution vote in 1997 had fewer voters voting for than for against?
Last time I looked the figures were just under2:1 for devolution. I can find them for you, if you want?
Unless of course you are using the old trick of saying everyone who didn't vote was against devolution; the immobile, the old, the sick, the dead, the mad, including the Lords and those enjoying HM's hospitality.
By your logic no member of parliament would be legitimate as the number of people who did not vote meant that the "winner" would always be the loser?
That trick was used in an earlier devolution vote and must be where Mugabe started his apprenticeship in gerrymandering the ballot box.
New Labour is not known in Scotland as ZaNuLabour for nothing.
Shame on you philward for being economical with truth and shame on everybody who read this on the English Broadcasting Corporation blog board not to recognise it for what it is; typical labour style lies and spin,
Philward, if you are going to misrepresent the truth please take a tip from me and do so in a way that cannot be checked. The Internet is a dual edged sword!
BYEEEEEEEEEEEE
Complain about this comment
145. At 5:42pm on 26 Jul 2008, grandantidote
"Do you see anywere in my post that he was democraticly elected as Prime Minister"
No, but I never said you did. My #141 simply quoted from the sentence in your #139 beginning:
"Has democracy suddenly been thrown aside by you people, Gordon Brown has been democratically elected by the people of this country"
It would have been true to say: Has democracy suddenly been thrown aside by you people, Gordon Brown has been quasi-democratically elected by the people of Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath....
"As for the continuous claims that he was not elected by his party, they are as ridiculous as those that make them, if a collection of people agree to elect a leader in any walk of life and there is only one person who puts his name in the hat then he is elected"
He was not the only person to put his name in the hat. John McDonnell MP also stood, but under the NuLabour rules that Brown and his then-mate Bliar pushed through needed 70+ MPs to nominate him. If we can believe the word of Diane Abbott MP, and in this instance I do, NuLabour whips and other Brownites threatened back-bench MPs by the hundred with much nastiness if they signed McDonnell's nomination.
Even if you regard that as a model of party democracy, note that even Mugabe held the 2nd round election with only one name on the ballot, allowing people to spoil their papers. NuLabour denied even that shred of democracy to their loyal party members.
"there is no glory for you although you might think so in calling GB "a sick and wounded creature inhabiting number ten."
It was not for glory I wrote that but out of sadness for what little remains of the left nowadays. His cowering in the No.10 bunker is doing as much harm to our future as if he were a paid agent of the Tories. If he hasn't listened and learnt by now, he should give someone else the chance to.
"you once again say he has no democratic legitimacy whatsoever"
He did receive the votes of 33.9% of the electorate of Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath and his party did receive the votes of nearly a quarter of the UK electorate, but that's it. Not enough for me to say either him or his party have democratic legitimacy. He has no democratic legitimacy as leader of his party, which as I pointed out all other PMs since Douglas-Home have had, and not even the guts to stage a vote of confidence as PM in the House of Cards.
Something you seem to share with the Tories is an almost religious fervour in the archaic system which is our non-constitution. I can only presume this is because you wish to have another "18 years of Tory misrule" to moan about just as the Tories got their kicks in the late '70s and early '80s by moaning about Labour's misrule and have lately been getting high on the last 11 years of Labour.
Yes, many want to change the system but because you get one chance to vote on ALL the issues about every four years (five in the case of lame ducks like Major and Brown) it's no wonder that Clinton's "It's the economy stupid" is all that voters generally think about.
The next time will be rather different because of NuLabour's cack-handed devolution. If NuLabour doesn't fix it before they leave office they'll not only be out of office but likely out of the union, too, leaving them in the wilderness for at least as long as the Tories have been and probably longer.
I could go on, but I'm losing the will to live.
Complain about this comment
147 get rid`1 What on earth makes you think that you represent everyone in the country and you say GB was unelected.
Complain about this comment
@148 jaquesmac
"if Scotland is so dependant on the genorosity of the "English" (M Thatcher) and are so much in need of tuition and subsidy why are they so loathe to cut them loose?"
I, like many people, tend to oppose Scottish independence because I recognise the strong cultural and historical links between the different nations of the British Isles. Scotland may get more money, but I haven't got any more of a problem in principle with that than I would for deprived areas in England receiving additional funding. The Union works on a fundamental level, and it's stupid to throw away 300 years of good relations based on atavistic longings sparked by rather poor Mel Gibson films.
However, when the Scots start making loud claims about being badly treated, all the time voting themselves extra luxuries like free prescriptions and university education using English money? Bring on the referendum, I say: I can't wait to see them try and balance the budget after the handouts dry up.
Complain about this comment
#149
Jacques - I suggest you learn to read. I didn't say that more voted against than in favour of devolution.
Out of an electorate of approximately 4.4m only 1.8m Scots voted for devolution in 1997. I am not claiming that the vote wasn't legitimate, simply that the majority of Scots did not vote for devolution.
Complain about this comment
151:
Who cares whether GB was democratically elected or not? That's a total red herring. The fact that he has made a total rat's bottom of the job so far (in my opinion of course) and his Chancellorship judgements have now been rumbled is far more relevant.
Complain about this comment
150 browndov, I will try to answer you post paragraph by paragraph, the first being of no consequence to this exchange of views. You say GB was quasi elected democratically by his constituency there was nothing quasi about it or are you now implying that he wasn't elected as MP.
Now you want to tell us that John McDonell was forced not to vote against GB for the Labour leadership, this of course would have nothing to do with the fact that he couldn't get enough MPs to back him,[ in the interest of common sense do you think there was the slightest chance of him ever being elected as PM], Now you suddenly want to to believe Diane Abbot, of course you do becaurse in this instance it serves your purpose, I personally have not the slightest regard for Mrs Abbot in my opinion the woman cannot be believed about anything including this issue. Can you imagine that people like Frank Field ,Clare Short, Bob Marshall, Jeremy Corbyn, Michael Meacher, and many others could have been intimidated into not having a vote had they of wanted one, what on earth do you think that anyone could do to them, none of them are jockeying to become ministers they are already on the outskirts of the party so they had nothing to fear, its absolute stuff and nonsense, I'm sure you cant imagine it
but whether you'll admit to it maybe another matter.
If you are really silly enough to even begin to compare the Labour party with Mugabwe then you obviosly need a reality check and I am wasting my time here.
Gordon brown is not in any way cowering in number ten, if were going to discuss at least try to stick to the truth, I have seen GB out and about as much if not more since the Glasgow election, so there's been no cowering. Your claim to being sad for the left does you about as much credit as your deliberate childish spelling of Blair.
Your opinion of the the system of voting in this country at the present time is of no consiquence unless you once again wish to lobby your MP, I doubt very much that you were making the same claim when the Tories were in power for eighteen years.
Why does he have to have a vote of confidence, no one in his party even the ones you like to quote have asked for this.
I have no religious fervour that I share with Tories and certainly not with regard to a constitution or non constitution I am in favour of having a constitution had there have been one there would have been a lot less chance of a break up of the Union, but I would not want any party to draw up a constitution it would have to be a all party debate with a free vote and under very close scrutiny. I have no desire to see the Tories back in power for one day never mind eighteen years, there are Tories that I like and in some ways would like to see them have a say in government but unless they walk across the house thats not going to happen. unless of course the Tories win the next election, the problem with that is that we will have to put up with the rest of the rather unpleasant charactors, to put it mildly.
your next two paragraphs I mostly disagree with and am not going to spend time in a effort to tell you why.
Complain about this comment
Re #152 robcraufurd
I think your understanding of the Scots would be better advanced by reading and airing your views on Brian Taylor's Blether with Brian blog than by watching 3rd rate Hollywood movies starring fading Australian actors.
If you care for the union at all, you may get some insight from the Mail's Could Mr Brown be the last Prime Minister of Great Britain?
That bodes very ill for anyone who cares about democracy in England because Mr Cameron is most unlikely to wish to change the archaic quasi-democratic voting system for Westminster as it is likely to give him a built-in Tory majority for decades.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
156 Browndov I agree with some of what you say here , I dont agree that Mel Gibson could be called a fading Australian actor or that "Braveheart" was a third rate Hollywood movie, in fact it was directed by him and although not strictly authentic it was excellent entertainment and a blockbuster.
I like you worry about the break up of the Union if it occurs and I fear for the English as it will be a one party anti EU state for many years and that cant be a good thing.
Complain about this comment
Re #155 grandantidote
"You say GB was quasi elected democratically by his constituency there was nothing quasi about it or are you now implying that he wasn't elected as MP."
He was elected as an MP by UK law. The problem is that UK law as it applies to electing MPs is by some way the least democratic in the EU. The last tinkering with the method was in 1872, making it even less democratic than before. Even the French insist on their President and representatives having a majority of the votes cast, as does the Constitution the UK Government handed down to Zimbabwe for its President, sadly honoured more in the breach than the observance of late.
"this of course would have nothing to do with the fact that he couldn't get enough MPs to back him"
I stand by what I said in my #150, except to apologise for my error in stating he needed 70+ nominations instead of the 45 actually needed in the absence of a sitting leader. The fact that you do not believe Diane Abbott's statement at the time you should back with evidence. I did not mention Tony Benn's support of McDonnell but that at least indicates some distaste for NuLabour amongst the real Labour Party hijacked by Bliar and Brown.
"If you are really silly enough to even begin to compare the Labour party with Mugabwe then you obviosly need a reality check and I am wasting my time here."
And if you are silly enough not to realise that the Labour NEC's declaration of Brown as leader by acclaim without a vote was even less democratic than Zimbabwe's 2nd round presidential election then so am I.
"Gordon brown is not in any way cowering in number ten"
I grant he completed a prior engagement in Warwick before hurrying back to No.10 ready for a photo-op with Obama. What he has not done is to respond with one word to show what he will change after all this listening he's been doing. As the Guardian and others have been saying, the parallels with the "we're not getting our presentation right" of the later Major years are uncanny.
"Your opinion of the the system of voting in this country at the present time is of no consiquence unless you once again wish to lobby your MP, I doubt very much that you were making the same claim when the Tories were in power for eighteen years."
Quite right that voting for a specific MP is the only current way to have any hope of changing the system. According I voted Liberal at my first opportunity in 1970 and have only ever voted for candidates supporting electoral reform since then. I hated the Thatcherite Tories just as much as I hate the NuLabour Tories. Cameron's Tories are a little less right wing than either but would not get my vote, if only for their continued opposition to electoral reform.
As an aside, one of the reasons I would have voted for Lisbon if given the chance is the belief that eventually there will be a case against the UK voting system in the European Courts.
"Why does he have to have a vote of confidence, no one in his party even the ones you like to quote have asked for this."
He doesn't, but at least it would have given him a veneer of democratic legitimacy. As he is no democrat, it clearly doesn't matter to him.
"I am in favour of having a constitution had there have been one there would have been a lot less chance of a break up of the Union, but I would not want any party to draw up a constitution it would have to be a all party debate with a free vote and under very close scrutiny."
Good for you, but I note sadly that you don't feel us poor mutts, the people, need to be asked.
"I have no desire to see the Tories back in power for one day never mind eighteen years....."
At last we agree on something, but there is every possibility of that coming about precisely because of the Buggins' turn inherent in the existing "system". Frankly it is likely to be even more because NuLabour's credibility is now in total meltdown and the built-in Tory majority in England is likely to grow. Without electoral reform, Labour (whether old or new) at Westminster are likely to be in the wilderness for some decades.
Complain about this comment
Re #158 grandantidote
OK - I don't pretend to be a film critic and will let others decide.
Re the Tores turning England into an anti-EU state, that's probably a small crumb of comfort to remember when you watch the 2010 election results coming in.
With only no effective opposition, Cameron's Tories may well rip themselves apart as they did over Maastricht. That can only be good for democracy and may be quite amusing to watch from the sidelines.
Complain about this comment
159 browndov with much reluctance you are agreeing with most of what I said,
he was elected under UK law. agreed.
second para graph, I just dont believe anything that woman says., as for Tony benn whats it got to do with him he'out of it but still keeps poking his nose in and I seldom agree with anything he has to say in fact I dislike that man more than anyone in the Tory party and value his opinion less, unlike his son who is a great politicion unlike his father.
third para, I stand by what I said earlier.
fourth para, no argument there ecept that it was more to Obama's advantage to be seen with Brown than the other way round british PM with American candidate.
fifth, you agree with me our opinions at this time are inconseqential.
sixth, you agree with me he doesn't
seventh, you agree with me.
eight, you agree with me.
Still would have credited you with more sense than to keep repeating Bliar in your posts, very sad.
Complain about this comment
re: 161 grandantidote
ah, you think Tony Benn's views are invalid and his son's views are all valid. That explains a lot.
Despite being labelled a tory by people on this blog I actually agree with almost everything that Tony Benn says when I hear him speak, because he's pragmatic, fair, and reasonable in most instances, and he has a great deal of common sense.
I'd certainly listen to him more than his son as his son is basically just a yes man who does everything he's told by his boss whereas Tony Benn has a brain of his own.
Sometimes I don't agree with Tony Benn, but that's quite rare and only on very specific topics, and I'd always listen to a man with that much experience/knowledge even if I ended up not agreeing with what he says.
He's a bit of an unsung hero is Tony Benn, my hat goes off to the man for what he's done/said in his political life so far.
Complain about this comment
Re #161 grandantidote
I feel I'm getting deja vu of some of brigdierjohn's posts here. You seem unwilling to concede that you might ever be mistaken. Such a view makes debate meaningless.
We clearly have a little common ground in despising the Thatcherite Tories but you obviously still believe in the lies and spin of the NuLabour Tories.
I am sad that you have no respect for Benn's views because more than any politician alive I can think of he is a fair and honourable one who has always been prepared to agree with anyone if they are right - including memorable discussions with the likes of Heath and Tebbit. I can disagree with many of his views while respecting the man.
I would say the jury should still be out on the view to take of his son. Currently he spouts NuLabour propaganda to avoid being out on his ear but without the same degree of conviction or mindlessness as the likes of Balls or Blears. Perhaps he's just biding his time.
I would forgive most of Bliar's lies and spin as part of the normal "rough and tumble" of politics were it not for the "big one" over Iraq and the war not being about "regime change". As someone who became a refugee from Kuwait after Saddam's invasion in 1990, I certainly had no love for that particular regime, nor any love for the Thatcher government which made promises to us refugees it never fulfilled.
Even so, the shortsightedness of an aggressive war which effectively handed supremacy in the region to the mad mullahs of Tehran still beggars belief. If NuLabour eventually apologise for their part in that process, I might start to re-evaluate them.
Complain about this comment
Re #162 getridofgordonnow
Well said. Glad you're not the only one.
As you say, it doesn't mean we have to agree with all of his views. I disagree with him pretty fundamentally on state ownership, for example, and would prefer effective state regulation instead.
The current government and Cameron's Tories seem to want neither.
Along with my belief in the need for real democracy, maybe that explains why, at heart, I'm a Liberal.
Complain about this comment
re: 151 grandantidote
"What on earth makes you think that you represent everyone in the country and you say GB was unelected. "
I don't pretend to represent everyone, I'm just expressing a view that seems to be in the majority.
Feel free to disagree with that view, but I'm not going to spend too much time debating the view because I think for most people it's a self-evident truth that Brown wasn't democratically elected.
Nobody ran against him, therefore by definition he wasn't democratically elected, he was instead crowned.
You could I suppose argue about why nobody stood against him, but I personally think that "well, nobody could ever do a better job than Gordon would do" isn't a good enough reason for labour to not have had a proper leadership election.
If Brown had any genuine democratic ideology whatsoever he would have said "look, someone else must stand, otherwise it's just not democratic. Let's debate our ideas out in the public arena and then let the MPs decide."
I can only guess at the kind of threats and bullying tactics he employed, but even the BBC, not known for it's anti-labour bias, reported on the heavies being employed by Brown when it came to "convincing" labour MPs that nobody else should stand against him.
Complain about this comment
PS to my #163
By the way, I should have declared an interest there, as in a minor way I'm a victim of The Bush/Bliar Iraq war, too, along with most private citizens awarded compensation after the first Gulf War.
In order to minimise the amount of public money going to support the mess they'd created to Iraqi civil society, a little known fact is that they effectively bankrupted the Compensation Commission from the first Gulf War so that even the modest compensation approved by the UN in Saddam's favour will never be paid in full.
Complain about this comment
Hey I'm not surprised you guys like Tony benn Thats the very reason that I dont like him , what has he done to make you take your hat of to him other than to your great joy run new Labour down because they havn't called on him.
Complain about this comment
Re #167 grandantidote
But if you're a NuLabour Tory, grandantidote what have you to be afraid of from Cameron's BluLabour Tories?
PS: If you answer honestly I promise to try to stop mentioning my unfavourite Mr B (ie not Brown) in responses to you.
Complain about this comment
167:
That is just the silliest of statements and a little bit like junior school playground talk. Develop a mind of your own. Which guys like Tony Benn anyway? I certainly don't!
Complain about this comment
Re #169 waldorf29
grandantidote's #167 is a cry from his NuLabour heart in response to my #159 & #163 plus getridofgordonnow's #162.
Complain about this comment
re: everything by grandantidote
grandantidote why is it exactly that you are so fond of New Labour? Is it because you think they're good in comparison to the Tories (bearing in mind your days as a raving Blue) or do you genuinely think they know what they're doing? If you think the latter, please explain what Labour's plan/vision whatever is because I haven't a clue. From here it looks like their plan is to spin so hard they drill a hole in the ground before doing the inevitable and putting the collective New Labour foot on the head of the floundering Brown and holding him under. And how can you justify their proven deceit?
Complain about this comment
I really like Tony Benn as a person, but as a politician he was dreadful. Happily I am able to separate the person from politics.
In comparison with Brown, Benn is saintly.
As for Brown I cannot stand as a person and in my opinion think he is really dangerous for the UK.
Complain about this comment
165
If Blair had said before the last election, I am going to be PM for two years then I am going to hand over to Brown, what does anyone think the result would have been?
I ask this as I know many people who would have voted differently.
Complain about this comment
168 Browndov The first point is that I dont agree with your presumption that I am a new Labour Tory since no party of that name exists it would be difficult for that to be possible, but lets not go along with that silly nonsense.
I do not consider Dave Cameron or GO people to be afraid of, their not clever enough to make me afraid of them the people I am afraid of are the old guard that are sat on the opposition benches, they are the ones that choose Cameron to front for them as he is not a bad looking chap and he's young and that nseems to sway the populace. We'll see how long he lasts if they get back in power.
You dont really believe that Cameron actually leads the Tory Party do you? Lord Ashcroft and the Tory backbenchers control the Tory party surely your not that Naive are you?.
As for honesty I always write what I percieve to be the truth, mostly backed by life experience and daily observation I may be wrong on occassion at which time I will [and have] apologize for my mistake but at no time am I ever likely to be browbeaten into agreeing with what I dont believe in.
As for your continued use of the name bliar then thats you choice but occassionally making a silly remark can be humourous, I think that you and ppl using these silly names are rather childish I can understand ppl using them as most of his postings look as if they come from an eight year old but I thought better of you, if you wish to carry on then thats your prerogative.
Complain about this comment
169Waldorf I dont like saying this but Its you thats being silly , because although often doing battle with you I rather like you.
The one who is being silly in this instance is you, the post was not intended for everyone. it was intended for the two people who were debating with me Tony benn ie getridofgordonnow and browndov, if you wished to have joined the debate you were quite welcome particularly as you dont like Tony Benn either.
Put my post in contex my friend then you might not find it so silly.
Complain about this comment
165 Getridofgordonnow, You start by saying
"I don't pretend to represent everyone, I'm just expressing a view that seems to be in the majority. "
You go on to say" that I'm not going to spend too much time debating the view because I think for most people it's a self-evident truth that Brown wasn't democratically elected". Not for me obviously
in fact the only time I have seen or heard that is on these blogs, by some not all, of you anti Labour zealots.
Then you spend the rest of your post putting your point of view on the subject.
What possible evidence have you got to substantiate your last paragraph? you have left yourself again a way to get out of these wild statements by saying
" I can only guess at the kind of threats and bullying tactics he employed,"
Well your right there chum you can only guess and with your track record your not likely to be biased are you?
Complain about this comment
re: 167 grandantidote
"Hey I'm not surprised you guys like Tony benn Thats the very reason that I dont like him , what has he done to make you take your hat of to him"
I like people who speak plain truths and who use logic/reason in their arguments but who also have a deep-seated sense of justice/fair-play. Sometimes I don't agree with him, but I'd always listen to him.
If he sees something that he thinks is unfair or wrong then he voices his concern, and that's unheard of with New Labour.
Actually that's one of the reasons that New Labour are in such trouble; they simply can't take criticism, everything is always some else's fault (perfect example being the New Labour line that the only reason they keep losing elections is because of the americans and it's got nothing to do with the government at all).
Complain about this comment
177 getrid of gordonnow I can listen to Tony benn I have done for many years, you say he says much that you agree with and some you dont. Well I guess the things that you agree with I probably dont and since I have practically always disagreed with the man then its a pretty sure thing that you might like and perhaps respect him,Idont.
The day of the dinosaurs has passed and we need no advice from them on how to survive. your last sentence completely baffles me.
Complain about this comment
The labour party lost loads of supporters when Blair was in power, I felt he had gone too far right, as did many others, I know lots of people who have felt they had been left outside any help from the then Goverment, all had to be private this and that, it was like listening to Margaret Thatcher all over again, the party should remember where the core of the labour party is, we are not rich and under this goverment getting poorer, will I vote labour again perhaps not, but I will not be voting for The Tory Party, so a waisted vote again,
Complain about this comment
Re #179 georgecerrig
I fully agree that our archaic voting system encourages votes to be wated - Labour would have LOST in 2005 under anything approaching a fair voting system, or at least been forced into tempering their views as a minority government or part of a coalition. As it is, Brown has inherited 100% of the power with the votes of less than 25% of the electorate - hence the difficulty in removing him.
If, like me, you believe that's a system failure, then check out the views of the candidates in your constituency who might have a realistic chance - say 2 or 3. If one of them believes in changing the system, that's the one to go for. If none of them do, it's harder, but in most constituencies there will be one of them in the top 2 or 3 that you dislike less than the others.
That's exactly what thousands of voters have just done in the recent by-elections, but neither the SNP nor the Tories are claiming they've won too many lifelong converts.
In the case of Glasgow East, I'd have voted SNP unhesitatingly although I'm a lifelong Liberal who would usually vote LibDem if I thought they had any chance.
Maggie Curran lost the seat for Labour by the making false statement that she'd always lived in the constituency and being found out on the fact that although she's been MSP for the same area for some time she did not know where the previous MP's constituency office was, never having been there.
No wonder the SNP, who were 2nd at the general election got the benefit of most swing voters.
So take heart and vote. If you don't like Labour, you'll be in good company and in the absence of better information vote for whoever you think can beat them.
Complain about this comment
Re #174 grandantidote
Thank you for responding in measured tones. I will attempt to do likewise. I will even refer to "new" Labour.
So you say you're not afraid of Cameron himself but his paymaster and his lobby fodder. I agree it's a fair point that you don't like Ashcroft. I don't particularly myself, but at least the Tories are fairly open about it, unlike Labour over the loans issue, where their Secretary-General didn't seem to know where the money was coming from. Do you prefer whatever deal that new Mr B is doing with the Unions and endorse them whatever they may be?
I'm more surprised that you're worried about Cameron being accountable to his MPs. I'm not sure you're correct but if you are then maybe I should reconsider the Tories altogether.
I thought that if it has any point at all, our creaking old system is designed to let us choose our own "Knights of the Shires" as our local representatives for a few years at a time. They are then supposed to act on our behalf in Parliament and vote with their consciences to represent us as best they can, holding the Ministers of the Crown to account.
If Cameron's back-benchers are really doing that in respect of their leader then they are better people than I had thought.
Given that you do not mention it, I can only presume that you applaud the blind and unquestioning loyalty given to the successive Mr Bs by their "new" Labour back-benchers, but not the "old" Labour rebels. If so, I would have to disagree with you as I believe the order of their loyalties should be: 1st their constituents, 2nd the UK, 3rd their party.
To summarise, it appears you prefer order and authority from above to laissez-faire and democracy from below and that you fear Cameron's Tories lean too far towards being closet liberals.
Please correct me if I'm wrong and let me know what other current parties, if any, you would ever consider voting for.
A slight aside, perhaps, but have you ever read any of Orwell's works? "Animal Farm" and "1984" are both short and good reads, while his other stuff is good but less approachable. If the first two don't or didn't change your view of life then nothing will.
For the record, I am an old Liberal generally in agreement with the LibDems, but given the current system I would always follow my own advice in #180.
Complain about this comment
181 browndov,There you go, in your first sentence you attempt to patronise me by saying "I will even refer to "new "labour, I without wanting to sound unkind. I dont give a damn whether you refer to them as new Labour or old Labour, to me although I more often than not refer to the Labour party,they are for me the socialist party.
Your second paragraph, glad you agree about Ashcroft then you say that the Tories are fairly open about it, are they how about Conrad Black for another one, the loans that labour recieved that so much fuss was made about is small change to what the Tories are getting on a weekly basis, if Labour are getting so much why are many of the Tories on here telling us that their near bankruptcy.
Yes I would much prefer that GB does a deal with the unions they are at least working men/women and working men/women are the very fundation of the socialist party. I would much prefer that to the Tories having an agreement with a man like Ashcroft who fooled Hague into getting him a peerage on the understanding that he would become a British citizen and pay his Taxes here,seven years later , his home is still in the tax haven of Belize, he still hasn't become a British citizen, he pays for all the flights of Cameron and the Tory front bench, he gives thousands to the Tories on a weekly basis he has loaned them £3.6 million. anyway look for your self you only have to put his name on your internet and press search, you will find that your prefered party are the most outspoken against him and you think tories having a deal with a man like that is preferable to labour striking up a deal with the working men/women of this country. I wont go into the Conrad Black saga you can if you wish. You'll find him in the same way, suffice to say he's in a jail in Canada.
I am afraid I have to stop here as I have a pressing engagement. If I can come back later to finish I will.
Complain about this comment
grandantidote:
scraping the barrel with Conrad Black aren't we?
Let's just examine NuLabour's personnel record.
First prime minister to be questioned by the police in number 10
Pete Mandleson sacked twice and still employed in brussels gravy train, despite granting passports to the hinduja brothers.
Steven Byers sacked for busting railtrack.
David Blunket sacked for giving a passport to his lover's nanny.
bernie Ecclestone revelaed as having bunged a million quid to NuLabour for Formula one advertisng only a month after NULabour took office in 1997 with a mandate to get trid of sleaze.
Prescott has an affair in his office in office hours with his diary secretary and then attends a memorial service with her and his wife at his side.
NuLabour NuSleaze. NuLabour, NuHubris
Complain about this comment
Re #182 grandantidote
Thank you for your response. I'm sorry that you seem to dislike my making any dinstinction between "old" and "new" Labour, but the latter term was very much in use by it's creators in the '90s. Some adjective is needed to distinguish between the group of Labour MPs you like and those you don't, so until you come up with a better one I will use the terms "new" and "old" to distinguish the two.
Please withdraw your words: "your prefered party".
I am not and never have been a supporter of the Tories and never will be unless they come to their senses over electoral reform. Please re-read the last para of my #181. I do accept that in my #180, my own advice might make my vote for a specific Tory in a specific constituency the leastworst option available.
Re Tory funding, I have a great deal of sympathy with what you say. Maybe the Met should take a close look at it, but I suspect the DPP would take the same view as he did over the Met's Labour funding enquiry when he announced there was insufficient evidence to secure convictions. Black's US conviction is being appealed, so we shouldn't rush to judgement on that.
I confess to being confused when you call both "new" & "old" Labour the "socialist party". Socialism was based on fairness of outcomes and the rights of man but with too little democracy and too much central control for the liking of an old Liberal like me. The people in charge of the current Labour Party strike me as having remembered the central control bit and forgotten the fairness and rights of man bits. To be fair to them, they have virtually eliminated the word "socialist" from their vocabulary, which is what I understand to be the essence of "new" Labour.
What you're left with doesn't strike me as very different from what the Tories offer but with more "Big Brother" about it.
If the unions take them back to their roots at all, I'll start re-appraising them, but for now the only UK-wide party pushing for fairness and the rights of man are the LibDems. As they're pushing for democracy too, I probably won't have anywhere else to go in the immediate future.
I'll look in again tonight.
Complain about this comment
178 grandantidote
"your last sentence completely baffles me."
I'm not sure why; Brown/Labour give that excuse for every election they lose and for every criticism they get regardless of the subject.
ie "Global economic conditions" are the cause of every single problem in the uk according to them (by which they implicitly mean the americans not running their economy properly) and labour/Brown have no responsibility/blame whatsoever for anything anywhere.
I'd suggest that although "global economic conditions" are partly to blame for adding to some of our woes, they're basically just an exacerbating factor for the uk; the real causes of the problems in the uk were created by brown/labour, the global downturn has just increased those problems a bit and brought things to a head faster than they otherwise might have done.
Complain about this comment
184 browndov You have made it clear on a number of occassions that you lean towards the liberal party, your prerogative but read again what I actually said
"anyway look for your self you only have to put his name on your internet and press search, you will find that your prefered party are the most outspoken against him" now that certainly would not have been the Tories now would it.I didn;t say or imply that you were a supporter of the Tory party
Just follow the instructions I gave you and you can read all sorts of information on the subject , it will only take a few seconds.
You have me wrong again with the new Labour, old Labour I thought that I had made ir clear that I dont care, they are the socialist party whether old or new and I have no particular feelings regarding new over old some I like and some I dont like,as in both the other parties.
Regarding Conrad Black if youare judged then jailed then you have been found guilty, if he can prove his innocence then he'll be freed until then he is a criminal and should be treated as one if he had no money no one would give a s**t.
Your fourth paragrapth I completly disagree with. Whithout going into to much detail this government has done more to give the working man fairness and rights than any other government in the last five hundred years I will just mention one thing minimum wage .opposed by both the Tories and Liberals. there are many other points but you know what they are its just that you dont want to know, and for goodness sake dont mention cctv, or similar.
I am afraid your wrong in para five the two parties are diametrically opposed.
I do have some sympathy for the liberal party , with such few members its difficult for them to make progress thats why the tend to be all things to all men but they have some good people but I think they chose the wrong leader Vince Cable would have been a great improvement on the present crop.
Complain about this comment
183 Robin JD, whats you problem with Conrad Black? still I guess you must be a Tory. lets first try to answer some of your claims. not that it will do any good as you are one of the people on here with a closed mind.
Tony Blair was he convicted or found to be implicated in any wrong doing whatsoever answer No, subject closed.
Peter mandleson a suspicion of wrong doing ,he resigned found not guilty returned to government no stain on his character accused once again by the Tories, he resigned . found not guilty of illegally obtaining passport for the induja brothers. Put up for election was elected returned to government, he is a extremely intelligent man so was offered a position in the EU where he has performed well.
Stephen Byers resigned after making a misleading statement to the house, he saved railtrack from impending derilection.
David Blunket used by a scheming woman in order to get her nanny a passport earlier than she would have done, now thats really scaping the bottom of the barrel.
Million quid of eccelstones money banged back to him shortly after recieving it.
John Prescott has affair with his diary secretary . admits to it apologises to the labour congress, apologises to parliament and apologises to wife who forgives him.
Thats the best you can do Robin is it , pretty pathetic.
Lets see if I can do better for the Tories,
John Major and Edwina Curry having an affair for years.
David Mellor found out for having a affair with his Spanish friend.
Cecil Parkinson having a affair with his secretary and having a child.
Tim Yeo having to resign after a affair with young Tory councilor,
Allan Clark having an affair with practically every woman he could.
Lets try sleaze.
Chairman of the tory party goes to jail. Jeffery Archer spends eighteen mons in jail fo perjury,
Johnathon Aitkin goes to jail for same thing,
Tory councillor gentleman john speechley jailed for being a very noughty boy in lincolnshire now in jail.
More recently Derek Conway.
anyway I'm bored now time for my afternoon nap.
Complain about this comment
re: 187
Not posting on the more recent threads grandantidote? I miss your Welsh wisdom!
Complain about this comment
Re #186 grandantidote
I am, as I've said in many posts, an old Liberal but despite your post you seem to confuse The LibDems with The Liberal Party. If you follow the link and read their policies, you should note that I disagree with them re Afghanistan and the Monarchy - I'm a republican. I go along with most of their other policies with a few small reservations such as the single currency.
Frankly I don't particularly care about one individual's donations nearly as much as the potential for corruption in the system as a whole and gave my view in my #184. You do however, highlight a difference between us by your illiberal attutide regarding Black's guilt until he can prove himself innocent. From that, may I know your views on 42 days and ID cards?
Anyone found guilty in a lower court of an offence for which imprisonment is the punishment should be detained in the public interest, but I do not believe in branding anyone guilty per se until they have exhausted the appeal processes available to them. More than 20 years ago I was the foreman of a jury in the Old Bailey which earned a tongue sandwich from the judge for declaring two defendants "Not Guilty" when the state had patently not proven its case to our satisfaction, let alone reasonable doubt. To be rid of us for good, he exonerated us all from jury service for life despite the whole trial lasting less than two full days. With such bias present in at least some of the judiciary, appeals are essential to many if they are to receive justice.
Re Black, for all I know he may be guilty but his conviction was in a foreign court of which I know little except that there is a long and involved appeals process at various levels. I'm also surprised that you make no distinction between conviction in a foreign court and conviction in the UK. If you have followed Black's trial in detail you may know something I do not, but I would expect HMG to provide him consular assistance throughout the process.
I agree that Cable would have been a better choice for the LibDems, but to the best of my knowledge he has never been a member of The Liberal Party.
The Liberal Party support a minimum wage set on the basis of reports from the Low Pay Unit. The LibDems may have opposed the minimum wage, but I simply don't recall their arguments at the time. For all I know it may have been one measure in an omnibus bill where they disliked other parts.
I do now see why you are not a Cameron Tory, but I still fail to understand in what sense you see the current Labour Party as socialist, except in their extension of state interference in daily life. Do you regard funding tax cuts for the wealthy by tax increases on the poor as socialist? I also find your faith in the word of the Labour leadership touching, if misguided.
Complain about this comment
I cant see why people are screaming from the rooftops saying that this is a Leadership challenge!
It is,t but for god sake, its doing my head in, hearing this and that...grr.
Brown might as well quit and allows us to choose who we want to lead as PM in a General Election.
Surely there is a loophole which should force Brown to hold a General Election.
He better hold one soon, Im getting sick and tired, this country has been worse since Brown took over and I thought I would never say this but, wheres Tony Blair when we need him??
Complain about this comment
re: 190 WebbyFoxes
Brown'll never quit voluntarily; I think he genuinely believes that he's got a divine right to rule the country forever.
(fingers in his ears, going "la-la-la, I can't hear you", then reiterating "I *am* your leader, and nobody else can ever do better than me so I will remain your leader forever whether you like it or not.")
He'd need to be physically escorted from the building by a security guard following a successful leadership battle against him.
I miss Tony Blair immensely too, but then again I knew I would even before Blair stepped down, because Brown's history/character/inabilities had already had 10 years of public show by then.
Maybe I live in a strange part of the uk, but everyone I knew said the same thing when Blair stepped down, ie along the lines of:
"call an election please, but if not then please don't leave Brown in charge because he'll make things 100 times worse and he's a terrifyingly incompetent/damaging/vindictive man who shouldn't be in charge of a chimp's tea party let alone the whole country".
As far as I know (although I might be wrong), if the labour party don't volunteer a pre-2010 election then the only person who can force one is the queen, either that or every opposition mp and a collection of labour rebels ganging up against the government to force one via a vote of no confidence.
My opinion is that the longer they leave it before a general election, the worse their result would be in that election, because the longer we'd have for more chickens coming home to roost. The country can only get worse with them in charge, so their poll ratings can only slide downwards apart from the occasional blip.
I think it's in the labour party's long term interest to call an election now even though they know they'd lose, because the longer they leave it the longer they'll be in the political wilderness post-election. Coming back from a 27% vote will take them about 10 to 15 year, coming back from a 15% vote could keep them out forever and make their party dissolve totally into historical oblivion.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS