Glasgee East by-election

[snowychap]

Some more comments in the aftermath of Glasgow east (both from Labourhome):

COMPASS: Nothing seems to change

The Glasgow East byelection result is another nail in the coffin of New Labour. Across the country, the electorate are crying out for change, they want a government that can help improve their lives. But a politics that is rooted in the 1990s has simply run out of answers. In response, the government once again claim they are listening, but things still seem unlikely to change; despite political wipe-out now staring Labour in the face.

This awful defeat vindicates what Compass has been saying for three years - that the coalition that brought Labour to power in 1997 has been shattered. Between 1997 and 2005, the party lost 4 million voters - and this time we saw a further pulling-away of the working-class vote that New Labour has always ill-advisedly taken for granted. Meanwhile, people across all classes and social groups are turning away from the party. Particularly in England the Tories are on the march; partly thanks to the sense that they are engaging with concerns that lie at the centre of people's lives.

Needless to say, Gordon Brown's stiff, remote style of leadership doesn't help. But there is a more fundamental political problem that is destroying the Labour Party. Even at a time when the credit crunch and rising prices mean that the post-Thatcher settlement is being questioned as never before, a supposedly progressive government refuses to address the way that the unrestrained free-market is damaging people's lives in no end of areas: from housing and rising fuel bills, to crippling consumer debt and insecurity at work, and on to the dysfunctional inequality that defines so many of the UK's current problems.

Others may be distracted by New Labour kremlinology, and the question of whether one of Brown's cabinet colleagues might somehow be persuaded to replace him. For us, there is no point in talking about such changes if the conversation isn't fundamentally about a change of direction that will revive people's confidence that the government is in touch with modern concerns, and in control of the forces that shape them.

There is little money left to spend and less than two years before the likely date of the next election, but that still leaves room for measures that would signal a change of direction and show that Labour understands the challenges of the 21st century. We would argue in favour of:

- A windfall tax on energy and oil companies to help those struggling with escalating fuel bills.

- A fairer tax system with a new top rate and a cut in taxes for the low paid with all new revenues ear marked to boost benefit levels for the poor. Some have suggested that those earning under £10,000 per year should pay no tax. This is clean, simple and very appealing.

- A new drive to build council houses. By 2010, 5 million people will need social housing, but this year, a start will be made on only 100,000 new homes. With private construction apparently in freefall, the state has to step in.

- A high-profile drive to improve people's working lives via government setting new standards. As a minimum, we need a new fair employment clause in all public contracts, to make sure that the public sector points the way out of the low pay culture that ensures - contrary to recent headlines about welfare reform - that work is still no guarantee of an exit from poverty. The government should take the lead of London and roll out a living wage nationwide in all public procurement contracts - which even Boris Johnson has raised in London in his first months in office.

- A moratorium on Post Office closures, and new protection for the universal service obligation of the Post Office.

- Abolishing the youth exemptions in the minimum wage.

- Help close the gender pay gap - with statutory pay audits for equality.

- Access to all local authority sports facilities free for children under 16 to confront the issues of obesity and anti-social behaviour head on.

- Across all these policy areas, if money is needed to deal with rising insecurity and anxiety then we should rethink the renewal of Trident and scrap the ID cards scheme. Government insiders claim that the latter is effectively being left to wither away, but where is the political advantage in that? On this, as with so many policies, a clear change has to be demonstrated.

Over the summer and beyond, Labour has to begin a conversation about all of this and take clear action, or face long years in the political wilderness. Compass intends to act as a catalyst for that process and play an active role in it.

[snowychap]

And from a PPC:

link

I am sick and tired of 'We are listening!' I don't think we are on any issue. This state of denial will lead to one thing, defeat! I have nothing to lose but the Labour party and the country have. Do we want another tory government, which destroyed our miners, taught our young that capitalism is the way forward. I say this with some meaning CHANGE POLICY NOW!!!!

Thanks

A frustrated PPC

John Wiseman

[ianrobo1]

well compass could almost be me eh ?

except the Post office bit ...

[snowychap]

I'm not sure that Gordo's speech in Warwick today followed this to the letter but that would have been quite funny:

link

Comrades,

I’m sure that you, like me, share a profound sense of disappointment at the loss of the Glasgow East by-election. However, what we must remember is that this was a marginal seat and was always going to be difficult to hold in the mid term. If we look at the sort of people who live there we find lots of very poor, working class people living in public housing. Many are unemployed. Frankly, these are not the sort of aspirational hard working families that are Labour’s core vote. We cannot be surprised that this is not a Labour seat and we should thank everyone involved in the campaign for getting our candidate so close to victory. Indeed, this defeat shows that we are on the path to victory at the next election, just as our defeats at Crewe and at Henley also demonstrated. At this stage in the electoral cycle every defeat is a victory.

Some of you have said that the government is drifting, that we have no plan. This is quite wrong. We have a number of plans. Firstly, wee Jimmy Purnell has just announced plans under our ‘Work shall set you free’ strategy to get the long term sick and disabled back to work. Secondly, under our new defence review ‘War is peace’ we have set out plans to spend £3bn on new nuclear warheads. Furthermore, the cause of peace may necessitate British forces attacking Iran should our bestest friend in the world deem it necessary. Never underestimate the lengths we will go to, the bombs we will buy, the wars we will fight to defend peace. Thirdly, our ‘Freedom is slavery’ policy is enjoying considerable success. We will introduce ID cards, limit the right to protest, lock up terrorists for as long as we like, keep a database of DNA from anyone that a police officer thinks necessary and continue to extradite people to the US on the flimsiest of pretexts without any reciprocal agreement.

Finally, we will limit what we tell people about our successes such as Tax Credits as we don’t want to boast. Also, we can’t have party members knowing what policy is let alone having a role in deciding it. Debate causes disunity and disunity leads to defeat. You don’t need to know in detail what we’re planning just cheer loudly when we announce it. If you don’t like it or don’t understand it, it doesn’t matter. You don’t need to, just trust that we know better. This ignorance is our strength as a party for it promotes unity around my leadership. So, let’s rally around and I’ll get on with the job.

[peterms]

I'm just wondering why at 7 this morning, with the result known, the poll said 50% of those predicting on this site said SNP, and now it says 48%.

Who has cast their vote after the election for a losing candidate?

Is it some of those people who think MON is lying in a jacuzzi and will make no signings this summer?

[Gringo]

problem is Gringo you would never win an election like that

Tosh. THe blue/nu/labour policy has been to suck up to big business and the media for too long and now they have to rely on union funds they're screwed.

Every other country in western europe has room for a left wing party - wy not the UK. Bliar should have ripped down thatchers edifaces when he had the chance, he should have restored the balance of worker versus corporation, he should have curtailed the mass media control of one man.

He did none.

He did the opposite.

There's no other choice now because he pushed the workers party onto the right wing and threw the workers out of the window.

And without the master politician at the helm, it all falls apart.

[ianrobo1]

Gringo in our electorial system you knwo it is the 15% of middle voters who decide

and they tend to be the aspiring middle class, some of the polcies compass suggest woudl work others not

guess the key is has always money and people's own pockets ....

along teh way someone has to pay

Take the Toroes that are committed to reducig corporation tax for 'competitive' reasons, nto sure how they have said this will be paid for, but really do companies need the money at teh moment ?

[Gringo]

in our electorial system you knwo it is the 15% of middle voters who decide

Because maggie sold the media to the right wing and tony continued the practice. Bliar sold thed the left wing out, face up to it - the sooner you do the sooner the "real labour party will stand up".

Stop defending the clowns who sold your party out and start fighting for a real socilaist govt.

[ianrobo1]

look at the maths, after the last eclection Labour controlled every major city (except Laaanden) but lost a lot of seats in the 'Burbs' do you really think areas like Enfield Southgate wuld ever elect a left party ???

however the left have amssive part because of the cities and thus going back to core is hwo it would go

but don;t forget the Tores did that with IDS and Hague and neither made any difference

[Gringo]

The tores did what with IDS and Hague?

I assume you mean they went right wing and failed to gain a mandate.

Well the IDS twins never contested an election and Hague was up against the supreme politician.

Labour were defeated yesterday by a socialist party.

The right lost, the left won. Lessons need to be learnt.

[ahamaad]

Interesting that Labous asked for a recount of the votes - the margin they lost by suggests they were well and truly fecked from the very start.

[nrogers]

The fact labour lost make me feel like this

[snowychap]

Interesting that Labous asked for a recount of the votes - the margin they lost by suggests they were well and truly fecked from the very start.

There appeared to be a doubt from the labour corner about the votes for 'Curran'.

There were two Currans standing for election and Francis Curran polled about 500 or so votes,

As the majority was 365, I assume they thought that all of those who had been counted as voting for Francis rather than Margaret Curran had been counted wrongly.

[snowychap]

Even La Toynbee has got her knife sharpened:

Cardiac arrest in Glasgow - and still the clunking mantra

That was a cardiac arrest in Labour heartlands. Glasgow East is so deep-dyed in Labour history that there are no excuses, with an ideal candidate and voters who might be proud of their Scottish prime minister. What has Labour done for a place like this? Unemployed claimants have been halved; hundreds more have left incapacity benefit to take jobs; of 11 new schools, five are rated "excellent"; apprenticeships have soared, and tax credits make a vast difference to people's lives.

Is that enough? Of course not. Anyone looking at Glasgow's East End knows it will take a generation or more of hard investment to make progress. If Cameron wins the next election, poverty will deepen, as he warned Glaswegians to their face when he said that the poor have only themselves to blame: if only they knew right from wrong they would not be in this plight. Yet still Labour couldn't win. No party has ever come back from a grave as deep as Labour's.

"Ungrateful buggers don't know what we've done for them," a Labour minister harrumphed after canvassing all day. Quite so, because Labour has utterly failed - on purpose - to say whose side it's on or what it believes, so the message never reached every corner of every place that stands to benefit. Now Labour has spent a decade ducking political definition, so even its own people no longer recognise the party as theirs. Without fighting excess at the top, without bold political symbolism, Labour doesn't get any credit for what it has done so invisibly.

Two hundred Labour stalwarts gathered at the national policy forum yesterday after the shock of the byelection. They were briefed that Gordon Brown would have no text, and would walk and talk hands free; he needed to show that he can in extremis speak human and express feelings to an audience willing him to be the leader they yearn for. A loyal audience gave a dutiful ovation, but it was a dismally mechanical performance. If this was Gordon does Dave, the comparison was excruciating.

He could do it without notes because it was an autopilot compilation of the dullest parts of every speech he has made, mantra after clunking mantra, pacing up and down to the same old tropes. With oil and food prices rising by the day, his party in ruins, his future in jeopardy and the country about to fall to the Tories, out came the same old figures: a hundred new airports in China, a million new cars in India, globalisation, environmental technology, the manufacture of iPods. In time of economic meltdown, his boast that world-beating "Britain can be the best in the global economy" sounds not aspirational but delusional. Toe-curling homilies to "hard-working families" are as tin-eared as his politics-light paeans to "opportunity". He bypassed the by-election as if it simply hadn't happened.

Naturally, all Labour ministers hastened yesterday to say what losing politicians must - they will now "listen and learn". But learn what, exactly? How much louder need voters shout before ministers get the message? Only 24 Labour MPs would survive a swing like Glasgow East's, only two cabinet ministers. It probably wouldn't be that bad - but the party faces an obliteration from which it might never return. Ahead lie years of Conservative government.

The battle has begun for the soul of the party after defeat. The marketising wing of Milburn, Purnell and Hutton in their Progress magazine push for more extreme Blairism - as if it hadn't just failed. (Milburn even wants to take the Sure Start money to give out as childcare vouchers to all - from poorer to richer.) They tar anything that smacks of social democracy as a "return to the 1970s".

The tattered remnants of the party might not be worth fighting over - but fight they all will, and this weekend's national policy forum is only a foretaste. The multitude of radical proposals from the unions look deadlocked at the time of writing. It's the misguided legacy of the New Labour years that it cannot be seen to give in to unions who foot 90% of Labour's bills, even when some of their proposals are exactly what Labour should do. Any leader must reject secondary picketing - that totem of the 1970s - but the trap Brown has set himself obliges him to reject almost everything they propose.

The voters of Glasgow East have propelled forward the chance of a move against Brown. Given how widely and semi-openly his removal is discussed among a string of cabinet ministers, it looks more likely than not.

Here's their scenario: in early September Jack Straw, with authority as Brown's campaign manager, rallies together at least 10 cabinet members to tell him they will resign immediately unless he goes gracefully, and at once. However much some allies urge Brown to stay for fear of worse disaster, he could not survive a mass resignation and would go. An orderly leadership election would follow, the two views of the future fighting it out. The Blairite extremists would be seen off and either Alan Johnson or David Miliband would come through - whoever emerged as the stronger in open contest. Both would fight on a more radical agenda to win the party vote, and a general election would follow within months.

But never underestimate the weak will to live of this limp party. Spinelessness vies with nihilistic despair, mindless managerialism competes with fear of a total implosion. Jousting for position, none may want to follow another's lead. Some will say the public would never forgive such frivolity in mid-recession, while others counter that it is recession that makes a new leader essential: Brown of the golden rule, the 10p tax-band abolition and "no return to Tory boom and bust" can't make the necessary U-turns. So, agonising and indecisive, the party may stagger on for 22 months to its inevitable perdition.

There is no point in changing leader without changin g direction. It seems hardly worth the effort of a second defenestration just to select a better presenter of equally pallid politics. So far it's hard to detect clarity of purpose in any of the likely assassins - so it's time the serious contenders spoke out. Why not start with that windfall of the oil companies' extra profits, using that £10bn to ease the pain of those on the lowest incomes? Let's see who dares support the bolder resolutions for the manifesto in Warwick this weekend, to put some fight back into Labour.