21 May 2007

Is this the end of what little democracy we had in the Labour Party?

What is the point of being in the Labour Party anymore? I felt quite important thinking a few million of us Labour party members and union members were going to have a say deciding the next PM.

But now all we have is a meaningless deputy PM election (I will probably reluctantly vote for Alan Johnson - as he is firmly a proportional representation supporter).

I have to say I share Gordon Brown's and the Parliamentary Labour Party's fears of John McDonnell. Even though he was hopelessly left-wing and had no chance of winning - he could have made Gordon look quite a fool when it came to debating the issues.

Humble my arse! This guy is now going to go round patronising Labour Party members for the next 6 weeks. If he really wanted to listen to us - he would have had a contest.

Even though everything we vote for at conference is ignored, Labour party members are allowed to have an opinion I suppose. We are not like the Tories who just have to accept whatever their leader wants. But at least they were allowed two leaders to vote on, even if they hadn't a clue what they stood for.

Well I suppose I will plod along in the Labour Party - still campaigning on the issues but I perfectly understand why so many others have given up and left - even if they are wrong to do so.

Saying all that when it comes to a choice between Gordon Brown and David Cameron there really is no contest - Gordon Brown at least has his heart in the right place when it comes to making life better for the poorest - Cameron is very obviously a total fraud.

5 comments:

  1. Amen. Interesting choice, Johnson, but I can see why you'd choose that way.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, Alan Johnson I know is a member of the Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform - made quite a few speechs for them and will hopefully push this issue with Brown. The signs are we might get the alternative vote - it is probably the best we are going to get in the short term. It will still mean hopelessly distorted results dependent on where they draw the boundaries but at least each area will have an MP people mostly want.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm pleased to hear you're staying in the party Neil but I have to disagree with your analysis.

    In most elections I've been involved in you need a certain number of people to nominate you in order to get on the ballot paper. There's an argument as to whether MPs should be the only part of the party that should have the right to nominate, but those have been the rules for quite some time.

    As for Gordon somehow lending McDonnell votes how odd would that have been? As a candidate surely his job was to ask as many MPs as he can muster to nominate him and not his opponent.

    We'll see about humble, and we'll see about the rest. But if McDonnell can't persuade his colleagues to nominate him and no one else wants to stand then I don't see how we can't blame Brown for that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think there was an atmosphere created in the Labour Party whereby MPs knew if they didn't back Brown things were going to be very difficult for them.

    Now of course Brown wanted to win - but lets be realistic - he could hve won without closing down debate like this. Still hopefully he knows what he is doing. Personally I think if Brown had had any sense a contest would have been to his advantage, as it is, this could come back to haunt him.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If they held a secret ballot things may have turned out differently. People were just thinking of their own careers. Shame.

    ReplyDelete