Pressure is building on Labour to spend time finding a new leader. A letter in this morning's Guardian makes the case for a slower leadership contest.
Pressure is building on the Labour party to spend months rather than weeks finding a new leader. After a series of articles in the blogosphere, a letter in this morning’s Guardian sets out the case for a slower leadership contest. Labour members are also encouraged to sign an online petition and write to caretaker leader Harriet Harman and General Secretary Ray Collins.
This morning’s Guardian carries a letter co-ordinated by the left-wing pressure group Compass and co-signed by a range of party activists including myself. It says:
“We cannot afford to rush, and there is no need to. The Tories and Lib Dems have locked themselves into a deadly embrace of pain and cuts before they can hope for any improvement in the polls. With a 77-seat majority, this is likely to be a five-year term. So first we need an inquest, not just into the campaign, but the last 13 years, with an open and honest appraisal of what worked and what didn’t. Then and only then should a full-scale leadership contest begin.”
Earlier this week, Sunder Katwala set out five reasons why the Labour party should go slow on Next Left. He points out that no Leader of the Opposition elected immediately after an election defeat has ever made it to Prime Minister in the post-war period and that the party needs a process that brings in new voters and captures the media and spotlight in the normally dead time of August and September. He also outlines that the Tories selected David Cameron on a “go slow” model but William Hague and IDs in a post-election rush. This point is echoed by Tom Watson MP, writing on Liberal Conspiracy, who also calls for a TV debate:
“So why don’t we learn from Michael Howard? Why not turn our conference into a platform for our future leaders. Give a day to each candidate to make their pitch. We could even test their TV skills with a big election-style debate.”
I would set out one further reason: The Emergency Budget will take place in late June. Does the Labour party really want to be focused on itself rather than the future of the country at that crucial juncture?
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
23 Responses to “Labour should go slow”
Matthew Cain
Agreed. But if we get the election process right, there’s no reason why it shoul be internal rather than inclusive. The more we do this in public (granted many won’t want to hear from Labour at the moment) the less it will be destructive.
My own thoughts are here, if you can help improve the idea: http://blog.matthewcain.co.uk/a-primary-vote-for-labour-party-leader/
Anon E Mouse
Will – Bang on the money but remember whatever cuts are coming down the line will be blamed on the previous government.
I also agree with Bryn The Cat that the Milibands should calm down – wait until the party conference I say before announcing leadership challenges and let’s copy the Tories with their Primaries thing – that just looks good to the public and keeps positive Labour stories in the media.
Finally let’s hope Dromey, Balls, Harman and co are resoundingly put in their place and no Campbell or Mandelson please – they are simply too polemic for the majority of people in this country.
Can’t you speak to your old man and get him to stand?
Mr. Sensible
Will I’d say that is a bit of a gamble. The Con Dem Nation (Thank You, Daily Mirror) might talk the talk about 5 years, but it’s day 3 and the cracks are starting to emerge.
We could yet end up with a second election; I read somewhere that Ladbrooks are cutting the odds of a second election to evens and Labour want to go in with a leader in place.
Michael Flynn
Why not take time? With the increased political awareness following the election Labour should use the leadership contest as a platform to air their policies!
Michael Collins
Labour needs a new leader who can act as a bridge between the old Blairite/Brownite acrimony, and the future generation.
Some of the younger candidates – such as David Milliband – are tainted by their association with the bitter personal and party divisions of the past. Ed Balls and David Milliband must not be allowed to repeat the rivalries of the Blair-Brown years.
And however “clever” the younger folk are supposed to be, they are not ready for power. Crucially, they do not connect well with the wider public. They are (and look like/sound like) Oxbridge-educated policy wonks.
There are two scenarios looking ahead. A combination of infighting and/or economic instability may bring down the coalition. In that case we need a leader who is a mature, calming and consensual influence. As has been said, in the event of an election in the next 24 months, Labour could benefit enormously from the anti-LD backlash.
But, if the coalition functions well, Labour may be out of power for some time. In this scenario, we also need a ‘transition’ candidate who is well placed to guide the party through a period of renewal and self-examination.
Alan Johnson has a great gift for communication, and the wider public – especially the disenfranchised Labour vote – will identify strongly with him. He would constitute an excellent contrast to Clegg and Cameron. He could take advantage of coalition failure, or guide the party through a prolonged period of opposition.
For the sake of the party, and the country he should reconsider his decision not to stand.