This Once Great Movement Of Ours

[Pulaski]

Reading Brown's article really drives home what a trick Labour missed in not electing him leader in 94. What a different Labour government we might have had.

(Yes, he was just as much responsible for reforming the party as Blair, but would certain bad decisions have been taken - e.g. Iraq?)

[JimJamUK]

Regardless of whether you agree with Brown, I’m not sure sending out the guy that most people (wrongly) blame for the last financial crisis will do any good for Labour’s reputation on the economy.

Brown is actually the most popular living former PM right now....

Oh he’s relatively popular (only -4% earlier this year, there’s not much competition), but I’m not sure he’s the right guy to speak on these issues (Labour’s enduring problem since Brown’s premiership is that the public think they will spend too much money and can’t manage the economy properly).

[Cassius]

Reading Brown's article really drives home what a trick Labour missed in not electing him leader in 94. What a different Labour government we might have had.

(Yes, he was just as much responsible for reforming the party as Blair, but would certain bad decisions have been taken - e.g. Iraq?)

Not an especially different one, given his massive and unprecedented influence over domestic policy during Blair’s premiership.’

[Blair]

Reading Brown's article really drives home what a trick Labour missed in not electing him leader in 94. What a different Labour government we might have had.

(Yes, he was just as much responsible for reforming the party as Blair, but would certain bad decisions have been taken - e.g. Iraq?)

He would not have been as evangelical about it but it’s likely he would have still committed UK troops- ironically he hated (at that time) Robin Cook who was ofc the most vocal critic of the war in the cabinet.

The only difference I expect would have been on tuition fees for university which I suspected Brown only supported out of loyalty (but might be wrong!)

[CumbrianLefty]

Following some not untypically confusing briefing, looks like there is going to be a Starmer fronted big announcement on Monday after all. There is quite a lot riding on this.

[Blair]

Following some not untypically confusing briefing, looks like there is going to be a Starmer fronted big announcement on Monday after all. There is quite a lot riding on this.

My only hope is that there is so much riding on this not being underwhelming that it would actually be an achievement to somehow ignore everyone in THIGMOO, the think tanks and the press who are all calling for action and warning Labour that the absence has been noted.

I think the briefing imo as about whether it’s a speech or an announcement- I assume it might be a joint Keir/Rachel or even Ed M event!

[Pulaski]

I'm a big fan of James O'Brien and his evisceration of James Cleverly contains just a smattering of the insane damage 12 years of Tory government has done to Britain.

"Twelve years, and everywhere you look there's a skip fire, or a clown car, or a skip fire in a clown car."

I make no bones of the fact I'm well to the left of Starmer and most of the current Labour leadership, but holy christ have Labour got to win the next election.

I ing hate Tories.

[CumbrianLefty]

Following some not untypically confusing briefing, looks like there is going to be a Starmer fronted big announcement on Monday after all. There is quite a lot riding on this.

My only hope is that there is so much riding on this not being underwhelming that it would actually be an achievement to somehow ignore everyone in THIGMOO, the think tanks and the press who are all calling for action and warning Labour that the absence has been noted.

I think the briefing imo as about whether it’s a speech or an announcement- I assume it might be a joint Keir/Rachel or even Ed M event!

Well, looks like it is a fairly substantial package.

The one widespread and reasonable caveat being made is that a straightforward cap at present levels doesn't take enough account of those who are already struggling *currently*.

Though its not impossible there will be things proposed to deal with that as well.

[Blair]

Following some not untypically confusing briefing, looks like there is going to be a Starmer fronted big announcement on Monday after all. There is quite a lot riding on this.

My only hope is that there is so much riding on this not being underwhelming that it would actually be an achievement to somehow ignore everyone in THIGMOO, the think tanks and the press who are all calling for action and warning Labour that the absence has been noted.

I think the briefing imo as about whether it’s a speech or an announcement- I assume it might be a joint Keir/Rachel or even Ed M event!

Well, looks like it is a fairly substantial package.

The one widespread and reasonable caveat being made is that a straightforward cap at present levels doesn't take enough account of those who are already struggling *currently*.

Though its not impossible there will be things proposed to deal with that as well.

I assume if it's like the February packet there will be a support fund for businesses, an expansion in UC & some of the various disability related benefits- which would allow them to still outflank Truss to a degree.

The actual test will be to spend the next month reminding everyone they have a plan, what it is & how it's funded (just to shut up the bad faith bollocks)

[CumbrianLefty]

Yesterday looks like it was a good day for Labour overall, which is nice.

And those trying to "own" Starmer by backing means testing just make themselves look silly.

[Blair]

Yesterday looks like it was a good day for Labour overall, which is nice.

And those trying to "own" Starmer by backing means testing just make themselves look silly.

Ed Miliband dealt with this very well on Sky- the presenter seemed very aghast at the idea that a midwife wasn’t on benefits and so couldn’t get means tested support.

I think one thing is that the scale of the crisis is so vast that even people who are objectively well paid are going to struggle- along with the fact it comes alongside stagnant pay and rising rents etc. Needs to be a universal package topped up.

[CumbrianLefty]

Still not much about helping businesses through this from Labour, hopefully that is coming soon?

[Blair]

Still not much about helping businesses through this from Labour, hopefully that is coming soon?

I would assume so! It featured in the February plan & the one bit of stakeholder work that seems to be working in THIGMOO atm is with business- and it's getting more coverage. If I was a Conservative MP I would be terrified of losing a number of high street businesses- they are usually ultra obsessive about this.

[JimJamUK]

Oops… (Survation claims it was from a 2020 deputy leadership template) https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1560601301183959041?s=21&t=3FmvO9jtbDeyG...

[Coldstream]

Oops… (Survation claims it was from a 2020 deputy leadership template) https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1560601301183959041?s=21&t=3FmvO9jtbDeyG...

This is a really bizarre story, at first I took survation at their word that it was a mistake - but the reactions have been so visceral it makes me wonder if RAK is plotting something. I know she’s not very popular with MPs anymore cos they see her as posturing, but she’s popular with the members.

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

Oops… (Survation claims it was from a 2020 deputy leadership template) https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1560601301183959041?s=21&t=3FmvO9jtbDeyG...

This is a really bizarre story, at first I took survation at their word that it was a mistake - but the reactions have been so visceral it makes me wonder if RAK is plotting something. I know she’s not very popular with MPs anymore cos they see her as posturing, but she’s popular with the members.

I'd been told the story about RAK supposedly asking her aides 'tell me one thing you've done today to make me Labour leader' before it got leaked, with the caveat that it was likely Chinese whispers. She's obviously ambitious but this just feels like classic THIGMOO backbiting/briefing ouroboros, maybe amplified by the fact that RAK hasn't spent years courting all the 'correct' tastemakers to make up for being a woman.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

She emerged as an actual political force quite suddenly and out of 'nowhere' during the Deputy contest and o/c that will always knock a few noses out of joint.

[CumbrianLefty]

Oops… (Survation claims it was from a 2020 deputy leadership template) https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1560601301183959041?s=21&t=3FmvO9jtbDeyG...

This is a really bizarre story, at first I took survation at their word that it was a mistake - but the reactions have been so visceral it makes me wonder if RAK is plotting something. I know she’s not very popular with MPs anymore cos they see her as posturing, but she’s popular with the members.

I'd been told the story about RAK supposedly asking her aides 'tell me one thing you've done today to make me Labour leader' before it got leaked, with the caveat that it was likely Chinese whispers. She's obviously ambitious but this just feels like classic THIGMOO backbiting/briefing ouroboros, maybe amplified by the fact that RAK hasn't spent years courting all the 'correct' tastemakers to make up for being a woman.

Which is, without doubt, one of the most admirable things about her.

[Coldstream]

She emerged as an actual political force quite suddenly and out of 'nowhere' during the Deputy contest and o/c that will always knock a few noses out of joint.

Her biggest problem is her biggest opportunity, she’s not beholden to anyone so she can say/do what she likes - but she’s also not got a power base within the party to deploy to defend her when she’s attacked.

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

She emerged as an actual political force quite suddenly and out of 'nowhere' during the Deputy contest and o/c that will always knock a few noses out of joint.

Which is, without doubt, one of the most admirable things about her.

Her biggest problem is her biggest opportunity, she’s not beholden to anyone so she can say/do what she likes - but she’s also not got a power base within the party to deploy to defend her when she’s attacked.

To copy something I wrote elsewhere:

There's been a tendency around here since the last leadership contest (where, yeah, the imagery of the world's most boring man sweeping aside an otherwise almost all-female field was pretty striking and not in a good way) to meme the Labour Party as a kind of implacable wall of misogyny. Obviously that's not wrong in the sense that society is like that and the Labour Party keeps reminding us that it isn't immune from society's prejudices. It also provides both catharsis for RLB and Nandy supporters and a good measure of how a lot of people have, without really acknowledging it, kinda fallen out of love with the idea of the membership-led party once it became clear it wasn't bound to reflect their priorities. But I'm not sure it really gets us closer to understanding what the obstacles are (and ideally dismantling them, not that anyone here can do that).

We've commented so much on Starmer sweeping aside RLB and Nandy that I think we've missed the really telling fact, which is that Thornberry and Phillips' potential support was just silently submerged into Starmer's even though they theoretically had a lot of it. I think that really illustrates what we all know, that the way high-level UK politics works most of the time is that you're expected to relentlessly cultivate a closed group of stakeholders. The only movement to really recognise how ed this could get was, to its credit, Corbynism, but it was so focused around one man and the rag-tag cadre around him (and their grudges) that it never got past the basic bitch solution of changing the names of the stakeholders and shutting out the ones you can't change, and never specifically clocked that obviously that's the kind of arrangement that has screwed over women since the dawn of time.

There are ways around it, of course. You can try to play the game the usual way, benefit from some parallel network, git really gud at building coalitions in a relatively brief space of time, or hope for a Corbyn-esque random outpouring of support around some dedicated sections of society. #1 is how Reeves or Cooper can be relentlessly and uncritically tipped for Greater Things. If we look at the other side of the aisle, it's also what we're actually saying when we talk about how Theresa May is the sort of person who unironically enjoys doorknocking and will happily turn up to every single party conference fringe event or village fete. #2 is RLB being supported by what was left of Corbynism (and if you recall, she had to see off whispering campaigns in favour of some of the most obviously unsuitable men available), #3 was Nandy talking round a specific sort of MP, impressing the GMB and cultivating random legacy organisations with three members, and Phillips sort of tried to combine #1 and #4 and got nowhere in the end. (Obviously I'm glad we don't live in the TL where Mumsnet entryists took over Labour and changed it so trans people get graphic hate mail instead of the emails reminding us to vote for the NEC, but I don't think she failed for the right reasons). Once you've gotten past all those barriers to entry, the actual campaigning stage is much less mediated - the male contenders could flop and you can impress at the hustings or whatever. Worked for Ed M and Corbyn, right? We can say the membership won't stand for it but I'm not really sure that's true - Thatcher being an unquestionable #girlboss is going to make things easier for any Tory woman who can push the correct buttons, but even with that in mind, is your average Labour member really more sexist than your average Tory member? I'm not sure that's true. The bigger problem is achieving that nebulous status of 'credible contender' in the eyes of the people who decide whether you even get a chance to find out.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I really do think we've made progress. There was once a time when it would have been unthinkable for Labour to elect a woman leader. Now it's possible, as long as she's made friends with all the right MPs, journos and trade union secretaries, is willing to put up with streams of online abuse and the strong possibility of failure, ideally has kids because it would be weird not to but also doesn't let them get in the way of her touring CLPs and so on, isn't too middle-class because otherwise you're a wine-sipping elitist but also isn't too working-class because then you're a slag, isn't too young, doesn't have too high a voice or anything like that, etc etc. Also there can't be a man who "we" have decided wants the job more.

[CumbrianLefty]

That really is a terrific read, with some sharp insights.

And yes, some on the hard left indeed wanted Ian Lavery to run for leader - IAN F***ING LAVERY - just let that sink in for a minute.

Certain of those would have backed C*r*s *i*l*a*s*n had he still been eligible.

Its not just (some of) the right of the party that has real ethics problems.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Giles Radice, MP for Chester-le-Street and then North Durham from 1973 until 2001 and for many years one of the most influential intellectuals on the right-wing of the Labour Party, has died. He was eighty five and had recently resigned from the House of Lords (to which he was appointed after he retired from the Commons).

[Blair]

Jas Athwal is running for Ilford South against tarry. No surprise and funnily enough me makes a mention of Ilford being the only seat he will run for!

It’s annoying to see this race being reported as getting revenge for Tarry over the strikes- we all know it would have happened regardless.

[Blair]

Found this by accident. Could not stop laughing.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson-hits-out-at-scab-tristram-hunt-for-crossing-picket-line-to-give-marx-lecture-9121775.html

[Blair]

Giles Radice, MP for Chester-le-Street and then North Durham from 1973 until 2001 and for many years one of the most influential intellectuals on the right-wing of the Labour Party, has died. He was eighty five and had recently resigned from the House of Lords (to which he was appointed after he retired from the Commons).

Has anyone read his book on the Attlee Government?