Next Leader of the Opposition

[Guest]

A bit surprising to see Chukkas Urmoney stand down, would think something is about to happen with one of the rags for such a climbdown in a short space of time.

 

That said, it takes a google search of less than twenty seconds to reveal that he's a spivvy millionaire, related to a family of titled aristocrats, who refers to the poor as 'trash' on social media in his own circle. Someone probably had a word and told him he wasn't wanted.

 

The list really does look a poor one, not one person who would scare the Tories.

 

Matt, the leader of the Labour party doesn't have to scare the tories. He/she has to find a direction and attract enough votes to beat the tories.

 

You don't think that Cameron actually frightens the Labour party do you?

[Alf Bentley]

Labour need to decide what they stand for and then choose a leader who exemplifies it and then make sure the population know what they stand for.

 

I disagree with some of you who think they need to find out what certain of the electorate want and then become that. It's a false premise, most of the population have only an overall idea of what they want and they don't know what they CAN have.

 

Define principles and then preach them and live them. Stand and fight on those priniciples - if you win, you can deliver, if you lose, no shame - it obviously isn't what the majority wanted.

 

If the parties took their unique stances and made them clear, the country would get what it wants unlike the present where the goal seems to be to chase the most votes instead of lead the voters to what you think is best for them.

 

Truth is MPs are thinking about their own jobs and not the people's jobs. 

 

I agree with this, provided you're talking at the level of broad principles, not precise policies.

 

But I don't think it's a straight choice between 2 polar opposites: either identify every policy you believe in and try to convince people (the 1983 Labour approach) or find out what people want and slavishly advocate that (the 1997 Labour approach).

 

You can be loyal to principles, but compromise on certain policies if you know that the electorate will not vote for them. It's better to end up in power, implementing 50% of what you'd have liked to do, rather then end up pure but powerless on the sidelines, implementing 0% of what you'd have liked to do.

 

There are political judgments to be made as to when you can persuade the electorate of a particular policy that they don't currently support, and when persuasion is impossible and you have to compromise on policy (without compromising on principle).

 

 

Off for another miserable weekend in London now. Sing loud in Sunderland, those lucky enough to be going....could do with some good news!

[Rincewind]

Matt, the leader of the Labour party doesn't have to scare the tories. He/she has to find a direction and attract enough votes to beat the tories.

 

You don't think that Cameron actually frightens the Labour party do you?

He frightens me.

[EnderbyFox]

Don't really find Cameron intimidating, his massive moon-like face is slightly unnerving though 

[Rincewind]

Don't really find Cameron intimidating, his massive moon-like face is slightly unnerving though 

It's what is hidden behind the smile that bothers me. A bit like a Bond villian just before he reveals his plans for world domination prior to placing Bond on a torture rack.

[MooseBreath]

Yes he strikes me as particularly villainous when he's announcing tax cuts for low income earners. So frightening.

[Rincewind]

Yes he strikes me as particularly villainous when he's announcing benefit cuts for low income earners. So frightening.

[Benji]

I'm getting slightly annoyed. It's been a week and I haven't received any middle/high income benefit breaks, yet. Starting to wonder if I've voted for the same Tory party I thought I was.

[Guest]

Cameron strikes me as a bit of a wet rag.

[GingerrrFox]

Chuka is definitely hiding something. You don't just pull out of something this high profile for no reason. 

[Facecloth]

If you were hiding something why join such a high profile contest in the first place. I think for once for a politician, he might actually be telling the truth and has realised its not for him right now.

[purpleronnie]

I'm with Ginger here, seems strange to remove himself the way he did, no doubt the true reason will come out....it always does eventually.

 

More depressing was Tristram Hunt on Question time, it's a sorry state of affairs when Brian May gets a better response than a Labour politician.

[BlueSi13]

Chuka can't

[Bettsj2]

I'm with Ginger here, seems strange to remove himself the way he did, no doubt the true reason will come out....it always does eventually.

More depressing was Tristram Hunt on Question time, it's a sorry state of affairs when Brian May gets a better response than a Labour politician.

This.

From the first question, Dimbleby actually had to say to him 'what are you talking about?' when he just didnt answer the first question at all.

Through the whole programme he displayed everything that you wouldnt want in a Labour leader.

Dreadful.

[Voll Blau]

Farage was nailed on about Hunt and what he's seen to represent within the Labour Party. UKIP have taken Labour voted because of perceptions about people like him.

[Guest MattP]

Tristram Hunt about to rule himself today.

 

Open goal for Burnham now surely, will have the support of the old school voters and the Unions. Can't lose.

[ADK]

Seems everyone is getting behind Burnham. Not a bad idea to be united.

[Strokes]

Seems everyone is getting behind Burnham. Not a bad idea to be united.

They were all behind Gordon Brown iirc.

[Guest MattP]

They were all behind Gordon Brown iirc.

 

And Ed.

[ADK]

I'd hardly say they were behind Ed. It was public knowledge he wasn't chosen by the party but by the unions and there was open talk of a campaign against his leadership as recently as a year ago. As for Gordon, well he did reasonably well considering he fought an election during the midst of a global recession and had the baggage of 3 terms of government to deal with.

[Guest MattP]

I'd hardly say they were behind Ed. It was public knowledge he wasn't chosen by the party but by the unions and there was open talk of a campaign against his leadership as recently as a year ago. As for Gordon, well he did reasonably well considering he fought an election during the midst of a global recession and had the baggage of 3 terms of government to deal with.

 

He was awful, he was paying half the country to vote for him and couldn't even win the election.

[Rincewind]

It may have been better if Milliband had stepped down two years ago. But hindsight will not change how things turned out.

[davieG]

Tristram Hunt backs Liz Kendall for Labour leadership

• 1 hour ago

•  
• From the sectionUK Politics

Tristram Hunt has said he does not plan to run for Labour Party leader, instead giving his backing to Liz Kendall.

Mr Hunt said he could not be confident of enough support from fellow MPs to launch a bid.

He also questioned the timescale of the leadership process, saying it had been "almost decided" within five days of the election.

Ms Kendall, Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Mary Creagh have put themselves forward for the leadership.

Candidates must get the support of 35 of the party's MPs in order to stand in the contest, which will be decided in September.

• Live political reaction and coverage of the Labour leadership contest

In a speech in London, Mr Hunt said he had "made a lot of calls" to other MPs, but said many of them were already committed to "just a small number of candidates", saying he found it surprising this had happened so soon after the "devastating" election defeat.

Ms Kendall, he said, would be able to confront the "big challenges" facing Labour and would have the "leadership mettle" to succeed.

Four candidates have already declared

He also criticised Ed Miliband's "timid" approach to the election.

Mr Miliband, who resigned after Labour's election defeat, was said to have pursued a 35% strategy - focusing on core Labour voters and disaffected Lib Dems and hoping UKIP would sink the Tories.

Mr Hunt said Labour needed a "100% strategy" that was "broad-based" and "forward-looking".

'Out of step'

He urged the party not to "turn inwards" and said merely "rediscovering Labour's beating heart" would not revive the party's electoral fortunes.

He suggested that what was needed was a return to the combination of economic discipline and social renewal that won Labour three election victories under Tony Blair, describing this as a "winning argument".

"Not since 1983 have we been so out of step with the prevailing mood of the nation," he told the event at the think tank Demos.

"But worse still, for perhaps the first time, we now face an electoral battle across three distinct fronts: the rise of nationalism in Scotland, a lack of trust in our traditional English heartlands and loss of confidence in Middle England."

Mr Hunt, a historian and the MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central, said Labour had "collectively dithered" on the question of devolving powers to other parts of England.

"The shadow cabinet was not united" when the Conservatives proposed new powers for Greater Manchester and other northern cities, he said, calling for "big and bold English devolution".

Mr Hunt also said Labour should consider freezing or reducing child benefit for school-age children to pay for a "universal right to free childcare" for all parents of two-year olds.

And he said the party "could and should" have prepared for tougher economic conditions during its time in government.

All the leadership contenders are setting out their stalls, with Mr Burnham - described as the "unifying" candidate by his supporters - calling for a referendum on the EU to be brought forward to 2016 and for an end to new free schools.

Ms Cooper, meanwhile, has said Labour must rethink its approach to business by dropping its opposition to corporation-tax cuts and consulting more closely with business leaders before developing new policies.

'No quick fix'

Ms Kendall has also won the backing of former minister Pat McFadden, who said she best understood that "Labour wins when it gives a positive, hopeful, optimistic story of the country's future as well as just collecting a set of causes and grievances".

Sir Keir Starmer, the former Director of Public Prosecutions who is now a Labour MP, told the BBC that he had not decided who to back but the party needed a "fully-formed leader able to hit the ground running from the very start".

Amid concerns that established candidates are hoovering up support among MPs, he told Newsnight "people are very quick to tell you who is going to win" but it was a long campaign and those standing needed to face up to the harsh realities of Labour's position.

"We cannot paper over the cracks," he said.

"There is no point in a quick fix which presents itself as unity but is not unity... We need to have that open debate and be brave enough to ask difficult questions and to see what answers are coming to us from outside our party."

A number of other prominent Labour MPs, including Dan Jarvis, Alan Johnson and David Lammy, have ruled themselves out of the race, while Chuka Umunna withdrew three days after entering the contest, citing concerns about media scrutiny of his family.

[Danno]

Thank god that scab twat can **** off. Imagine being called Tristram.

[Bilo]

Burnham is growing on me, but the Shadow Cabinet he puts together is pivotal. Fill it full of familiar New Labour faces and the electorate will wonder what's new.

Throw in a few up and coming new faces such as Jarvis, Starmer and Umunna and it starts to look more electable.

I'll most likely vote for him, but he has to get this right.