Showing posts with label UK parties. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UK parties. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Next Labour? Oh dear! Not Labour is more accurate.

When Gordon Brown stepped down as Prime Minister he left both new and old Labour as a busted flush. Still retaining some loyalty in Scotland and Wales but disliked throughout the rest of the UK.

Next Labour? New Labour signalled a sell out to Conservatism. Sticking another adjective in front will just show that Labour still hasn't a clue what the hell it stands for.

What we do know is that it is not Labour ie the working classes that they represent so "Not Labour" would probably be the most honest re-branding of all.

My cynical prediction for next Labour leader is Andy Burnham. I think that Labour will want someone who can challenge the Tories and Liberal Democrats on their own turf. That means they need a blandly handsome individual with no particular political ethos.

Ed and David are bland but they are not handsome and to be brutally frank they come across as oddballs on TV. They inherited some political good will and credibility from their principled father. Unfortunately in actual action they have been less successful.

While it is unfair to judge a person based upon their looks, if you bear a resemblance to a gasping goldfish unfortunately that becomes a factor. The older Miliband looked out of his depth at the foreign office and the USA did not take him seriously. Who could? He looked like a serious young lad who was up past his bedtime and was playing at being a serious politician.

This worked out for Gordon Brown who wanted to remain the main figure in his Government. After his 'warfare' with Tony Blair (which probably was very useful to the Labour Government as a distraction from political issues) he was no doubt nervous of promoting anyone into such a potentially powerful position who might have been able to use it as a platform. No, it was no doubt thought better to promote an ambitious follower rather than a future leader. Of course later on Mr Miliband tried to oust Brown but his actual credibility was no match for Mr Brown's even at the fag end of his administration.

Brown was always a 'big figure'. As a unionist his first loyalty was never to Scotland and therefore I have never had much regard for him, however it has to be said that he was a much more substantial figure than Tony Blair and David Cameron. Gordon Brown's main fault was to be a Scot at a time where Scotland had began to retain some of its power through devolution. If he had called an election shortly after taking over as PM he might have managed to win over England.

As it was the caricature of a "Brown Bottler" became his trademark. The public (well actually the tabloid press) decided they were sick of his face and wanted an election. From that point he was a dead duck Prime Minister. Unfortunately Labour (as we now see very clearly) had no alternative leader in the wings. In Scotland probably most people (and where the tabloids have less direct influence) felt he should be given a chance to prove himself, in England that was not the case.

David Cameron might be best described as another Tony Blair, while Nick Clegg might be seen as a Tony Blair twice removed or even a David Cameron copy.

Cameron was the product of a long search for Tory leader in which every variation was tried. Eventually it was decided that the whole brand was toxic and the Tories needed someone who could pretend he had sort of drifted into Conservatism by mistake. If Cameron had failed then I suspect Boris Johnson would have been the next candidate.

Cameron is a true Tory with true Tory instincts (ie a dislike for the poor) but who is also a PR man who can pretend otherwise. It is true he has changed politics. He was the man who became what Blair wanted to become, the true heir to Blair. A man with a better smile and with even less political principle.

Unfortunately for him at the point he was elected, Blair himself had outlasted his usefulness and was now something of a liability. Along with Blair's fall a distrust of spin persisted.

That is why Cameron failed to win the election outright, however Nick Clegg has proven to be a perfect ally because they are birds of a very similar political plumage.

Clegg was brought in when Ming Campbell was removed. Campbell, another clever Scot, proved to be too old and decrepit to challenge the new boy David. So it was the more handsome Clegg rather than the smarter Chris Huhne who became the Liberals leader. (Huhne was lining himself up for Home Secretary, the only big job the Libs would have had. I suspect it was Nick Clegg rather than David Cameron who decided he shouldn't get it).

[Any rational analysis of the new Government by the way suggests some brilliant negotiation by the Conservatives and some disastrous errors by the Liberal Democrats. Every major post is held by the Tories and the LD's have effectively sold out their 'big idea' Proportional Representation. AV is not true PR and a referendum on that is likely to lead to a continuation of FPTP. Welcome to the political wilderness Liberals. Your old party will get stuffed very shortly and deservedly, leaving UK politics back with the big two.]

So where is Labour now? Well I think it is fair to say that at the moment they are floating dead in the water and the antics of the Milbands are being treated, not unnaturally, as the last gasps of a corpse.

Their published views so far indicate that the Milly boys are not leaders with their own political judgement. What they actually are is mouthpieces for a discredited political party whose mouths are still opening and closing on reflex.

They are the entrée dishes and the main course has yet to be served. The real fight will be between Alan Johnson and Andy Burnham. Johnson is a credible candidate but I suspect in this PR obsessed time his age will be a factor. Burnham (or someone similar) will win but his party will still be moribund and politically irrelevant.

I expect the future leader (whoever it is) to fail against David Cameron (who will not need the Lib Dems post the next election). I suspect at UK level the people will see at least a decade and probably much more without another Labour Government.

At that point a new leader may arrive who will move Labour back to the political left. However by then it will be far too late.

Despair then? Hardly. Scotland has an opportunity to escape the bland faces of British politics with relative ease and the SNP will fight the next elections in Scotland from Scotland which makes all the difference.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

BBC are colluding with Brit parties to exclude SNP/PC

16/03/2010

Dear Sirs,

Thanks for your reply. The problem is that you are providing the UK wide parties with a political advantage over those parties which are only active in one country within the UK.

Nonetheless all the UK has an interest in the future independence of any part. Excluding arguments over independence in Scotland and Wales means an important political dimension of the UK general election has been ignored. This suits the unionists but it does not suit the peoples of Scotland and Wales whose potential political choice is being ignored.

Yes there will be 'regional debates' but Scotland is a country not a region and in these debates the local branches of the UK parties will be there as well. That means they get two bites at appealing to the electors while SNP get just one. Is that fair?

Post devolution much of the proposed debate will be irrelevant to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

You should therefore have had seperate debates for England with the three main English/UK parties and seperate debates including Plaid Cymru (to be shown in Wales) SNP (to be shown in Scotland) and the NI parties (for Northern Ireland).

The SNP is fighting every seat in Scotland and could potentially have 30 or more MP's. In a hung parliament (as is likely given the fact all the UK parties are politically indistinguishable) the SNP could hold the balance of power. The SNP are relevant therefore to the whole of the UK.

By treating the SNP as functionally irrelevant within the UK system you have proven that the UK is too inflexible to represent the views of Wales and Scotland. While this is no bad lesson to learn the BBC should still be ashamed of allowing the UK parties to easily portray their nationalist opponents as irrelevant.

I received a letter from Nick Clegg today, I quote: "And when it comes to Westminster elections, the SNP are irrelevant - too small to change anything."

Isn't that what your 'explanation' implies as well?

Clearly you take the British part of your name very seriously but you see your requirements for ensuring equal share of TV coverage as much less important. I am not impressed and I will personally argue for the removal of the license fee in future.

You have failed Scotland and ignored our politics, shame on you!

Joe Middleton


----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 11:53 AM
Subject: BBC Complaints [T2010031602N3S060]


> Thanks for your e-mail.
>
> We note that you're unhappy that the Scottish Nationalist Party has not been invited to take part in the planned Prime Ministerial Debates.
>
> Televised debates between those party leaders who aspire to be Prime Minister of the UK have never taken place before, despite some evidence that the electorate would welcome such a development. The BBC - along with ITV and Sky - put forward proposals aimed at establishing in principle that such debates would take place during the coming General Election campaign for the Westminster Parliament.
>
> It was announced on December 21st that the three largest parties at Westminster had agreed, in principle, to the broadcasters' proposal.
>
> The broadcasters also made it clear that each - individually - would put forward additional proposals to ensure due impartiality across the UK. The BBC will hold election debates between the largest parties in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
>
> The details of the BBC's UK-wide debate have now been agreed in full. You can read more in the following blog by the BBC's Chief Adviser, Politics, Ric Bailey:
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2010/03/prime_ministerial_debates.html
>
> Further information on the Prime Ministerial debates and the leaders debates in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are also available on the BBC Press Office website:
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2010/03_march/02/debates.shtml
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2010/03_march/02/debates2.shtml
>
> For all other parties, the BBC will also bring forward proposals to ensure that there are opportunities for their views to be given appropriate coverage in the context of the UK-wide debate.
>
> For the Westminster Parliament, that context is the aspiration to form a government and to become Prime Minister. The Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru, each fielding candidates in only one part of the UK, do not aspire to win a majority of the seats in the House of Commons. The party leaders do not aspire to be Prime Minister of the UK.
>
> On the basis of the 2005 General Election, the number of seats held by the SNP and Plaid is a fraction of those held by the Liberal Democrats.
>
> It is entirely appropriate and consistent, therefore, for the BBC's Prime Ministerial debate to include the three largest UK-wide parties. Other parties, including the SNP and Plaid, will have the opportunity for their views to receive appropriate coverage, both in national debates in Scotland and Wales and additional coverage across the BBC in response to the UK-wide debate.
>
> However, we would like to assure you that we've registered your complaint on our audience log. This is a daily report of audience feedback that's circulated to many BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers.
>
> The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content.
>
> Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.
>
> Regards
>
> BBC Complaints
> ________________________________________________
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/homepage/