PBC Guest slot: Introducing “Red Sky” - a “shy” Labour MP
May 27th, 2006
-
Who’ll succeed John Prescott as Deputy Leader?
You’ve heard of shy Tory voters. Well, I’m a shy Labour MP who’s been reading the site for a while. While Nick Palmer and to some extent Stewart Jackson seem willing to post under their own names with reckless abandon, most MPs are reticent about accumulating a trail of comments that can be dug up years later.
And I don’t have the time for the running battles that most of you seem to enjoy, so I shan’t often post. But here are a few thoughts that may be of interest to you punters.
The first question is whether there will be a contest. John P doesn’t need to stand down as Deputy Leader, and if he chooses not to, there’s unlikely to be a challenge before the next General Election.
Most people reckon he’ll go when Tony goes, which I reckon is likely to be in 2007. Still, if you get the chance to bet on John still being there in 2009 and get odds of 4-1, it’s worth a punt.
Assuming he does call it a day, who are we likely to see standing? Alan Johnson has let it be known that he will, and he’s probably the closest we’ll see to an officially-blessed candidate. Tony rates him very highly, and Gordon is OK with him too.
Harriet Harman will stand if there is no other strong female candidate, which seems quite likely. At one stage Tessa Jowell was seen as a likely candidate, but now probably not. Hazel Blears is an outside possibility, and would be a competitor with Alan for official blessing. There is a significant number of women MPs who will instinctively rally to any strong woman candidate, and who see a ‘balanced ticket’ in gender terms as very important.
What if members want someone who is a bit less on-message than all of these? The Campaign Group is not optimistic about getting the necessary 44 signatures, but it’s probable that Peter Hain will throw his hat in the ring. He is known as somewhat greener and somewhat lefter than most Cabinet Ministers without getting into head-banging territory, and his Northern Ireland role gives him scope to show it, on issues as diverse as grammar schools and nuclear reactors.
Other possibilities include Jack Straw, who is seen as more dovish than most on foreign policy, John Denham, who would be popular with members who were actively opposed to Iraq, and Hilary Benn, who has the dual advantage of a hugely popular job and the family name. However, it’s not clear that any of these are interested, and Benn and Denham are both known to have declined offers of new Ministerial jobs that would have broadened their range of contacts.
Labour elects its leaders through an electoral college, with the PLP, unions and individual members each ‘weighted’ as a third. How would the above fare?
Johnson is likely to get a large chunk of the PLP. He has few enemies, and people see him as a safe pair of hands at a time when solid competence is needed more than anything else. Tories foam at the mouth about his compromise with the public sector unions, but Labour MPs see it as a sensible deal. Harman would get a respectable vote, especially women MPs but also those who remember her civil liberties background and admire her intellect. Blears would take a chunk of the women’s vote and a chunk of the Blair loyalists too. Hain would get most of the left, many of the Welsh MPs, and the quite significant green vote.
What about the unions? Johnson is the obvious choice as a former union leader, but it ain’t as simple as that. Harman’s husband’s TGWU connections give her a useful “in”, and Hain would appeal to leaders like Derek Simpson who want to see new policies as well as new faces.
The wider membership is very hard to call. Many of the most critical members have left, so a hard-core rebel would have limited support, but members too would like to see policy renewal, and Johnson’s establishment blessing isn’t necessarily an advantage with the wider membership.
So at this stage it’s pretty open. There is a limit to how many people can get 44 signatures, since the more senior MPs aren’t going to be endorsing anyone publicly. We’ll probably see a field of three or four. Johnson will start as favourite, but if you get decent odds on Harman or Hain they are worth backing, as they are likely to harden up.
How much does this matter to the political scene? More than you’d think, because Gordon is unlikely to be opposed at all, so this is how Labour’s members are going to show which way they want the party to go. Watch this space!
Red Sky is a Labour MP
Note from Mike Smithson: As yet, as far as I can see, there are no betting markets on the next Deputy Labour leader. PB.C welcomes guest contributors like Red Sky’s who have something interesting to say and who do not, for whatever reason, want their identities revealed. The only condition is that I need to know who is behind pieces that are published here.
MessageSpace Advertising
Welcome to the site Red Sky - a good analysis flawed, in my view, by the premise that Gordon Brown is a certainty to get the top job unopposed. Once Tony announces he’s going then the media clamour for a contest will be very difficult to contain and someone will be tempted.
The weakness of the Chancellor’s position is that a significant segment of the Labour vote would would not automatically move over from a Blair-led party to a Brown one and the air would be think with polls in the days after the Blair departure announcement.
Getting 44 fellow MPs to sign up with their support might appear difficult but would be forthcoming even if the total was made of of MPs saying they were only supporting somebody else so there could be a contest.
I do not think that Brown has the temperament to fight a contest. I cannot envisage him being a supplicant - asking people to vote for him will not come naturally.
One thing that has been rarely mentioned in the “will Gordon face a challenge? debate” is that as the expected day of Blair’s departure has been put back and put back, so other people who might think of themselves as PM material have got older. So now for many this could be their last chance to become PM, and if Gordon loses the next election Labour are bound to skip a generation or two looking for “renewal”.
Backbenchers with little outward ambition like Nick may see no problem with everyone stepping aside, but history has shown us that there’s always someone, even in the LibDems, who will stick their head above the parapet and attract support and credibility almost automatically as a result.
One name Red Sky doesn’t mention is that of Hilary Armstrong. Surely an ex-Chief Whip must always be a strong contender in an inner-Party election (since they know where the bodies are buried)and I suspect that if there is to be female candidate she has the priceless advantage that she isn’t Blears, Harman or Jowell…
An interesting article, thanks.
Would Johnson be helped or hindered by running for the leadership at the same time? The last two long-serving deputy leaders, John Prescott and Roy Hattersley both ran unsuccessfully for the top job, but while Prescott seemed to be in the leadership race ‘for show’, Hattersley was in the deputy leader contest for the same reason and didn’t want the job he got landed with for nine years.
Despite his obvious shortcomings as a minister, I believe Prescott has been the best deputy leader of the Labour party for decades, and perhaps ever, for the simple reason that he regarded it as a proper job in its own right, not a consolation prize or stepping stone. The difference this time, of course, is that if Gordon Brown wins, he won’t be there for 13 or 14 years.
As a Labour MP, can I ask a question which has been bugging me recently and that is, in a parliamentary debate why do Labour MP’s “pop up” more often than opposition MP’s (or is that just how the House is arranged)?
The breadth of this site means that anonymous postings are accepted.
Many MPs read this site, but very few have the balls to post in their own names. Thanks, Stewart and Nick.
To dismiss them as ‘having little outward ambition’ is harsh.
And to claim that it is ‘risky’ to post something that may be thrown back in their face is wet. Who said ‘when I’m wrong, I change my mind. What do you do?’
Anyone from the Left standing? 44 signatures could be too much for them, but an alliance with the soft left could help finding them.
6 - I’m sure that Nick has many ambitions. But i haven’t seen any indication that he has the slightest interest in securing high public office, let alone be Prime Minister.
O/T I am alone in finding Ming Campbell’s attempt to talk tough on crime yesterday desperate stuff, the act of a drowning man ?
I note the pledge to give prisoners the vote is now being dropped (or watered down, it’s unclear). Many of the Lib Dems on this site denied this policy had cost them votes at the GE…were they wrong about that, or is Ming wrong?
Is Nick Palmer being “reckless” every time he clicks that “Enter” key? Perhaps, but I think that a lot of strong opponents of the Labour Party (eg. me) respect Nick for doing it, plus he is clearly an intelligent and usually reasonable character. I don’t think that it does the Labour Party any harm at all to have Nick representing them here, but I do wonder if it may be doing Nick’s own internal Labour career some harm.
10. As far as I can see he doesn’t have much of an internal Labour career anyway, so perhaps that doesn’t concern him very much. His career as an MP is likely to draw to a close fairly soon as well, so perhaps he is contemplating retiring to become a full time blogger.
As well as Nick and Stewart Jackson there are 3 or 4 MPs to my knowledge who regularly post here under assumed names.
We have also seen John Hemmings post under his own name.
Mike Smithson
12. Can you give us the party breakdown of those MPs, Mike? I would guess at least two are Lib Dems…
Hazel Blears!! You have got to be joking, I thought she was a garden gnome until she started to move. Did she get her big break in the old BBC programme called ‘The Gnomes of Dulwich’, or would that make her too Thatcherite
14. I though the reference to Harriet Harman’s ‘intellect’ was even funnier.
Nick Clegg has been caught out briefing against Ming, I see….surely that 25-28 month price on HiLo is going to start sliding soon.
12 - So Jack W IS Sarah Teather - Who’d have guessed
17. No, he’s a Blair’s bab*…I let you to pick up the right one!
18 - Kali Mountford?
As for the new Deputy Leader (good piece BTW) I differ from Mike in believing that GB is a dead cert for PM. I’ve still seen nothing that makes me think any of the potential challengers would attract the kind of support needed to derail GB.
17/18 John O/Andrea. Careful my children …. your benevolent dictator is tolerant ….. upto a point …. and a sharp point at that !!
19. Max, Jack will certainly shine in a Sun King’s wig….
Guido’s blog has the names of the applicants for the new South Northamptonshire constituency. The seat will be a safe tory one, so the selected one is almost sure to become MP.
21 - Andrea is Brian Binley going to stand down? I thought he would have got to take over in South Northamptonshire as I thought his Northampton South seat was abolished.
Thanks for the friendly comments. My career position is straightforward - I’d have liked to do more, accept it’s unlikely after 9 years (for whatever reason), enjoy what I do anyway, and look forward to supporting the cause in any role that I’m asked. (I’ve nothing but contempt for people whose view of their party ebbs and flows with their career prospects.) Notts County’s speculates that I contribute because (I assume) he thinks Broxtowe will go Tory next time, which it may or may not, but I was contributing here long before the last election, when the outlook was also uncertain.
I don’t comment on individuals but in general think the article is accurate, though I believe that TB will carry on till 2008 if possible, and for reasons discussed previously I think it would be a good thing for the party if he did.
Harry - MPs stand up to confirm that they’re interested in speaking (in most debates they have to let the Speaker know in advance as well). In Question Time there is a list of MPs who are certain to be called (drawn at random) and the Speaker then fills in with alternating people from the other side. So if the random list has four consecutive Opposition MPs, the four next called sponaneously will all be Labour, and you’ll see more Labour MPs standing. The reverse is true too, though - it depends on the draw.
In debates, it depends on the subject. Something like education or overseas aid will bring in droves of Labour MPs, something like rural grants or country sports will bring in lots of Tories. The whips of all parties try to encourage some participation in any subject of public interest - e.g. there was mild Tory embarrassment when we pointed out that they had no MPs present at a committee discussing European immigration policy, at a time when Europe and immigration were supposedly key Tory concerns.
22. Max, Northampton South won’t be abolished.
Among the applicants I think there’re 5 not A lister:Jonathan Bullock, Timothy Richard Coleridge, Matthew Collings, Jason Steen and Caroline Flynn-MacLeod.
anyone could confirm I haven’t missed other names?
22/24. According to Wells’ figures Northampton South will become notional Labour though (a 3.7% majority)
24 - Thanks Andrea I wasn’t sure. So which seats has South Northamtonshire been created from?
I think Jason Steen is on the A-list not sure about the others though.
12/13 Mike/County. Save Nick and Stuart I now know of two other Labour MP posters and one Conservative, all occassional. One Lib Dem regular and one occasional. One Peer also posts (Not from Beaconsfield !).
Red Sky thanks for an interesting post. But I agree with Mike S that GB will not succeed unopposed if at all and either eventuality will throw your assessment into confusion.
The death knell for The Dour One’s ambition may well be the Scottish elections. The Scottish press and political firmament is thick with talk of the wrong sort of nationalism after TDO’s own goal about English goals against Scotland. TDO may know his football but he seems to have been forgetful of his nation’s sensitivities. Dunfermline was perhaps a foretaste of what is to come?
If poor Scottish results are combined with continual personal and party poll ratings and another disaster in the English locals then TDO will be challenged as the writing will be on the wall. Step forward John Major II.
Nick Palmer I am sure you are right and Blair will be around until at least 2008. And the election will be in 2010 at the last possible minute. Can the Red Major pull off another 1992?
26. Max I think a lot of it comes from the old Daventry constituency, the new Daventry is greatly reworked as I understand it.
26. Max, parts of Northampton South and parts of Daventry.
yes, Steen is on the A List…check the others too, because I looked very fast through the list and it’s possible they’re on the list and I missed them
16 - Fred, really? Do you have any reference or other evidence to back your claim? I’m used to not take your news too seriously if you don’t have proof.
28 - His comment on Gazza’s goal at Euro ‘96 was extraodinary. It’s a bit like saying your favourite bit of Braveheart was when William Wallace got hung! I wonder if we can get odds on GB taking up Morris Dancing by the eve of the next election.
Francis - you are Gordon Brown and I claim my five pints of warm (English) beer!
Thanks for your article Red Sky. I’ve long been an admirer of Johnson and think he’s probably your best choice in terms of competence in government, leadership and I think he’s impressed enough people over education to be a uniting figure.
Can I second the appreciation of the MPs who post openly on here-your insight and honesty is a key part of making the site what it is.
lastly, am I the only LD getting a bit worried by what Ming is saying at the moment? Yesterday it was a big ‘let’s be as nasty as the others on crime’ speech, a pretty sensible (but not, at least for me, a big deal) policy on criminals’ voting, and today he’s saying that politicians should never eever encourage violence as a response to Gorgeous George. Since when was he an advocate of pacificm come what may? Still, saying something is better than saying nothing.
9 -Notts County. Yes I noticed this from Ming-ids Campbell. It is an attempt to set an agenda and to try and get noticed for sounding Conservative.
4- David. Prescott is a joke. If he is their best then Lord help us all.
Having a woman as Deputy next time just because it looks good would say a lot about the shambolic state of the Labour Party.
29 Fred considering the majority in Daventry and the Tory history (briefly interrupted) in Northampton South. have we now three Tory seats in the southern part of that county?
I have hopes of Northampton North, too, as the old demographics are changing there, but perhaps not enough nor quick enough.
Well certainly the new Daventry and Sth Northamptonshire seats should be very safe ones. The new Northampton Sth is on paper a Labour marginal as Andrea mentioned, though given the national position as it stands I would think it is very likely to be won by the Tories too. Not sure about Northampton North - the Lib Dems have been doing quite well there of late…in principle they could help the Tories win the seat if they take a lot of votes off Labour but it may be too much of a stretch.
31 x may
See Iain Dale’s blog.
34. Prescott is a joke as a minister, a speaker and in his private life, agreed. However, as a deputy leader he’s done a fine job. He’s not been looking to replace Blair and has been consistently supportive of the leader, while retaining (until recently) a strong link with grass-roots supporters and activists - despite two jags, three homes and all that. Crucially, he’s been able to give this support because he’s satisfied with being deputy leader. That’s important. Any deputy who wants to succeed the leader will have a very different relationship and certainly not a better one. Likewise one who didn’t really want it in the first place.
That said, I can see Johnson ending up as deputy if he puts his name forward for both positions in a double election, though as Red Sky (I nearly wrote ‘Red Flag’ then, how achronistic of me!) said, it’s no certainty that there will be elections for leader and deputy at the same time.
First time I have ever commented on this website, though have been visiting for ages on and off.
However, I felt compelled to comment on this particular thread. If ‘Red Sky’ our anonymous Labour MP likes his anonymity so he cannot be called to account for his real views later in the day - I hope he was not a Labour MP who voted to introduce ID cards, because if he were - my god - how hypocritical would that be? Enormously - just like many of Labour MPs (in fact most, if not all.)
Interesting analysis Red Sky, but I have to agree (in part) with Mike and B2W. I expect there to be some challengers to Brown, hopefully more than just one from the left of the party. Although I expect Brown to win, who his challengers are, and how they perform will affect the election of a debuty leader (and also the future of your party!
)
Red Sky
You mention Harriet Harman as a possible contender for Prescott’s job, I thought that she had lost credibilty and many potential supporters in your party when she decided to send her son to a selective grammar school in Kent.
It seems that despite what she was preaching before the 97 election the state schools in her Peckham constituency and numerous others in south London were not good enough!
Thank you for a very interesting article Red Sky.
On the point concerning women candidates for deputy leader, HH has been making that point on GMTV…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5021220.stm
BTW does anyone understand her last comment - “We need a few more rows about this; from time to time we need to kick up.”? Kick up what?
39. Perhaps Red Sky wants to remain anonymous so they can actually say what they feel like and think, rather than have to tow the party line for fear of being labelled a rebel or maverick.
42. I think she means kick up a fuss about the fact that the women in the party are still marginalised in terms of their power when compared to the men.
23-Nick Palmer
In view of the comments by John Reid that the Home Office is ‘not fit for purpose’ and his admission that at present he can’t trust figures that are produced by it; presumably this would also apply to the figures that the Home Office produced for the cost of ID cards.
We all remember how scornful Charles Clarke was of the London School of Economics figures which were much higher than the governments.
Surely,now in view of the compelling proof we have regarding the Home Office’s incomopetence a review of the cost of this project is unavoidable.
33 - Regarding Ming and prisoners, I’m not happy at all with this shift. If he thinks that being less liberal is the way to keep on board potential tory switchers he is completely wrong. The way to do it is to have a more laissez-faire economic policy, the idea that liberals should be less socially liberal is political suicide!
45. Smacks of desperation, as I said. I don’t think it’s even been thought of as a tactical way to attract switchers, it’s just a cack handed attempt to grab some headlines.
45. I know plenty of young LD voters who would get rightously angry with a shift towards laissez-faire economic policies (mainly those who rate international development as one of the key issues they care about). As I have said before, Ming should be (and probably is) going for Labour voters.
Personally I would like to hear a little more radical thinking about crime, like tackling the root causes. Some sensible drugs policy thinking perhaps, considering a huge amount of crime is drugs related.
47 - And therein lies the perennial problem and why, if PR arrives, lib dems will be the first party to split. Some lib dem voters, like myself, are unlikely to vote labour and others are unlikely to vote conservative, what central causes can bring us together (Iraq was useful in this respect) and how can the more divisive issues be fudged?
37
Any odds yet on Ming stepping down from the Lib Dem leadership (for Health reasons) before the end of this year?
“More than you’d think, because Gordon is unlikely to be opposed at all” - I disagree, I predict that there will be a challenge from David Milliband or Alan Milburn and that if they survive the initial pressure to ’stand aside for the coronation’ they could win or come close. I would guess that they would have little problem getting more than 44 MPs to back them. I guess Red Sky must be a Brown supporter.
50. Alan Milburn becoming leader is more or less like Clare Short trying to become Miss Birmingham……
50 - That confirms it! Lay Milburn! Lay Miliband! Back Johnson!
48. I would have my money on Labour going first; they are a pretty loose confederation of free marketeers, trade unionists, left wing idealists, social progressivists and authoritarian types. Plus unpopularity always deepens divisions.
51. Indeed, poor Alan, I used to have some respect for the man a while back… Milliband might have a go though, I would like to see Reid step in, maybe Jack Straw as the consensus candidate.
Sighs - another thread full of pointlessly silly “Ming’s doomed” comments. Bored now.
33/45 - His speeech on crime is full of good liberal common-sense. If you think differently, try reading it for yourself: http://www.libdems.org.uk/party/people/campbell-crime-speech-06.html
54 - Maybe it was, the problem with it was that no one was paying any attention to Ming when he said it.
54 -
He says “Penalties should go beyond custody. People like Ian Huntley should not have the vote. If you are guilty of a serious breach of the law, you forfeit the right to elect those who make the law. ”
Firstly, I findamentally disagree, secondly the use of Huntley’s name is the worst sort of ‘Daily Mail-isation’ to appeal to kneejerk reactionaries everywhere.
This is not worthy of him and not worthy of a liberal party.
Thanks for your article Red Sky. I agree with you that GB is unlikely to face a serious challenge if for no other reason that there would be mayhem from the Brownites if he didn’t get it. That said thoughtful Labour MPs like yourself must be worried by his poor poll ratings. Another tour de force from TB at George Washington University shows what you will miss and GB’s poll ratings are awful. Just twelve months ago GB seemed essential to Labour’s election victory now it seems very unlikely that he’s the answer to Labour’s Southern discomfort.
56 - fine you can disagree. But perhaps you can also accept that your views don’t necessarily equal liberalism. There is nothing illiberal in what you quote, nor in the rest of the speech. (Unless you can find me the passage from Mill which advocates votes for murderers.)
58 - To me it’s the height of illiberalism, Mill was, of course, alive at a time when democracy was hardly as it is now so that’s a complete red herring.
Surely the inclusion of a criminal within the democratic system is an important part of rehabilitation, to ensure that the criminal sees themself as part of society and its rules, not separate from it.
Why particular crimes in any case? Why not all? The only consistent position is to say all those in prison cannot vote or they all can. Given that, I’ll take the latter.
54. I have no problems with what he said in the speech, but reading over it, its what he doesn’t say that slightly unsettles me.
He doesn’t talk about tackling why criminals commit crimes, I know why he doesn’t, because to do so is to seem soft on crime and providing excuses for criminals. But we will not seriously tackle crime unless we get to grips with why criminals are criminals.
So that means doing something about drugs, something about the drink culture in the UK, really getting to grips with getting people out of long term poverty and doing something about the lack of respect in society.
59. Well, that’s perhaps what seperates liberals from conservatives (oh, and about 20% in the polls
). Yes, rehabilitation of anyone not on a full-life tariff is obviously an important part of the criminal justice system, but you give the answer to your own question - their inclusion within the voting class should be part of their rehabilitation; to do this only makes sense if it is one of the things people lose when they are imprisoned and lose for the duration of their incarceration.
No-one has a fundamental right to a vote; it is something earned as a valued member of society. It is entirely right that people who flout society’s laws should lose that priviledge while they are being punished.
59
‘Surely the inclusion of a criminal within the democratic system is an important part of rehabilitation, to ensure that the criminal sees themself as part of society and its rules, not separate from it.’
No problem with this after the criminal has served their sentence and been realeased back into the community,whilst they are in prison, by definition they are excluded from society.
61 - Which is where the state can then deny that right to those it, but not others, consider undesirable.
To me it’s an absolute, as soon as you take away that right then you allow the government a hand in saying who can and who cannot vote and I find that totally unacceptable.
61, 62. Agree with both of you, as does Ming. Common ground methinks! https://www.libdems.org.uk/support/join.html?ref=joinq
Innocent, 8.17 am is uncomfortably early to commence with bad jokes! I know that there ight be a feeling abroad that Labour might want to replace a male bad joke with a female one but, frankly, Teresa May or Sara Teather would stand better chances to replace John Prescott than does HA. Perhaps there will be a write-in campaign for Ming Campbell?
60. Well that sounds like a Nu Labour manifesto circa 1997 - are you sure you are in the right party? The apparent obsession with international development (an issue that I’m sure resonates mightily on the doorsteps of marginal seats across the land) also rather smacks of TB’s and GB’s ‘crusades’ to entrench (sorry that should read ‘end’) poverty in Africa…
163. Just as a matter of interest, which constituency would you have them vote in? If it’s the one in which they’re residing, then adding 1000+ convicts to a constituency’s electoral role could have a very real impact on the outcome of an election. Even more so in council elections. Canvassing might be interesting as well!!
167 - I would have thought the last known address before incarceration. Maybe having candidates talk to prisoners might just give them a better understanding of crime, motivation and cure!
Just read Ming’s speech - thanks for the link Joe Fairw.
But I think I’m with ukpaul on this. (and also Tistoph at 60 on tackling the root causes of crime.)
My only consolation is that we’re talking about what Ming’s saying, which is much preferable to what he’s not saying..
167. According the Prison Reform Trust, 2 seats had more prisoners held in the constituency than the actual majority in 1997. Dorset South and Wellingborough.
63. ukpaul - not allowing the state any right in determining who may vote is a very absolutist position - would you allow lunatics to vote as well, then? Be careful or you may end up arguing the state also has no right to incarcerate criminals, as after all this involves deciding who may and may not have freedom of association.
Isn’t Libdem policy to give the vote to anyone more likely to vote Libdem?
16 and 17 year olds due to soft cannabis policies? prisoners due to being soft on punishments?
Everyone agrees with tackling the root causes of crime - that is not controversial, or ’soft’, territory. Remember “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime”?
And Ming addresses the subject full-on - again, from his speech:
“The measures I have outlined today are immediate steps. They can be taken now.
“But over the long term, if we are serious about fighting crime, serious about tackling social justice, and serious about building social mobility, we need a comprehensive approach to the rebuilding and regeneration of communities as a whole.”
How is that not being liberal?
71 - I knew the mental capacity issue would come up, I should have mentioned it in the first post but I thought it was obvious.
Mental capacity is decided on by medical professionals not the state. There are grey areas however as, in some countries, tame doctors can suggest mental illness as a cover for political opposition. If there is a clear separation between the state and the assessment of mental illness, there should be no problem.
The ability to vote is, of course, nothing to do with the rightness or not of incarceration. That was your suggestion not mine.
170 - surely Sittingbourne and Sheppey had more prisoners than the majority. There are 3 prisons on the Isle of Sheppey: Elmley (975 prisoners), Swaleside (771) and Standford Hill (463). The Parliamentary majority for Labour is 79.
How popular would giving prisioners the vote be with prison staff? And do staff outnumber prisoners?
75. I was referring to 1997 (as I said in my comment). I took the info from http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/file_25_5_2001.html
175 - Rochester Prison - 389 inmates - BMA in Medway is majority 213 for Labour.
No-one wants to be DPM. The title has no meaning other than as a badge of humiliation, look at hattersley, beckett, prezza… The only way of assessing who will be dpm is assessing who will just miss out on the top job.
JP will go at same time as TB for a sensible leader/dep leader election. Let’s see if GB is the only leadership candidate too arrogant not to stand for both … and be left empty handed.
I think a Johnson for PM/Miliband DPM ticket would destroy not only Brown, but Cameron as well - achieving the trick of being firmly rooted in socialism, but radical modernisers too.
Rough
176 - thanks, got that now. Sorry! Wonder if there are any others now?
74. Most medical professionals work for the state though, don’t they? so is there a clear separation in the UK? you seem unwilling to commit yourself on this point…
I’m going to press you on the other point, too. You believe it seems that the right to vote is a fundamental human right that cannot be taken away from any individual, no matter how heinous their crime. But freedom of association is too, yet it is widely accepted this freedom may be properly restricted by the state in the interests of the wider public.
I think a lot of people might think removing someone’s liberty, (in some cases perpetually) is a much graver infringement of their human rights than denying them the opportunity to vote for the ‘Focus Team’ in elections…you apparently don’t. Why?
75 - I think they mean by their place of residence pre-imprisonment, not where they are imprisoned. The idea would be, I believe, to give prisoners the votes in the constituency they are from.
Also, I doubt there are more staff than prisoners.
81 - that makes sense. Otherwise, Kent, which is awash with prisons could generate even more interesting results. (Found another in BMA’s constituency - Cookham Wood - 151 female prisoners)
Was there some Victorian policy of filling Kent with prisons? Was there similarly a policy of filling Essex with mental hospitals? I seem to recall reading this somewhere once.
182. I don’t want to see BMA going crazy on election night accusing Blair to have made him lose the prisoners vote!
66. Well that manifesto was very popular…IIRC did the Tories not get their arsed kicked so badly at that election its taken them until now to recover?
Labour have not actually delivered on what they promised, this is the problem. They have no tackled the hard issues, they just went for soft targets which look good as headlines (like 700 000 children out of poverty, which they have been using for the last 2-3 years).
As for Africa, the problem is a horribly complicated composite of endemic corruption, poor governance, poor guidance, poor conditions in return for the payment of aid, a colonial legacy those in power have been only too happy to continue and an AIDS pandemic which has knocked the GDP back by approx 11%. Also I think you might find that Cameron may end up with rather similar policies re; Africa to Brown and Blair.
I’m not saying International Development is a major issue anyway, I am just saying that I know people to whom it is (including myself). I am quite sure it is a minor issue to most people.
82. Maybe the idea was to swing the Devon West constituency back to the Lib Dems…I think it includes Dartmoor.
Come to think of it, it could save Jim Knight’s neck in South Dorset too…fair few prisoners on Portland (not including the inhabitants).
84. So you supported Nu Lab in 1997, then?
85 - alas the majority is much bigger than Dartmoor’s number of inmates. Still, as long as the prison population keeps increasing and overcrowding goes on, there’s hope yet in Devon West. But please note that not all criminals are Liberal Democrats. (The converse is also true.)
some Labour internal plots:
http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/breakingnews/tm_objectid=17135365&method=full&siteid=50061&headline=mersey-mp-hits-back-in-labour-party-smears-row-name_page.html
I agree with Mike Smithson regarding the assertion by Red Sky that Gordon Brown will be elected Labour Leader unopposed. I am not surprised that Brownites within the party would prefer a coronation rather than a leadership contest. Gordon Brown’s personal popularity has until recently been a big asset to his leadership ambitions, but the decline in his popularity over recent months will continue and I think that makes it more likely that someone will challenge him when TB stands down.
As Mike has already pointed out the media will be clamouring for a leadership contest, and anyone within the Labour party who thinks that it won’t really matter to most voters will be making a mistake. I predict that by not having a leadership contest Labour would then not get the honeymoon bounce it expects in the polls.
88 - The other prison issue that has arisen in the US is how to count them in the census. Currently they are counted as living in the state/district/ward where the prison is located. Given that many prisons are in rural areas, and many government programs/funding are driven by headcount, the Democrats have been arguing that it skews all the funding calcs to have the prisoners included as if they live in the local community, to the detriment of the urban areas where many of the prisoners come from. It may also mess up calcs of electoral district size.
88. Just their biggest financial donor!
86 - The Verne (585 inmates), Portland (389 young offenders - so votes at 16 also need to make a difference here.)
89. The reference to ‘trots’ in that story takes me back a few years! haven’t heard that since the early eighties. Nick Palmer was one back then I think…but I would be hard pressed to think of anyone in the current Labour party who really fits the bill.
94. In that context (the NEC) I think they referred to the likes of Christine Shawcroft…not that she’s a trot, but she’s quite hard-left.
According to a former Labour staff member (who wrote a piece in the Daily Mail some time ago), Clare Short was nicknamed as “Clare Trot” in Labour West Midland Office
80 - busy working this afternoon so can’t enter into an extended sicussion but briefly, an attempt to move into definitions of what is and is not the state doesn’t help your argument. Doctors work for the state but remain an adjunct to it not part of it, jails are imposing the will of the state and, as such, there can be little such separation. Personally I’d prefer a complete separation, as I would in my own field of education, I don’t know of any party that would suggest that however.
The idea of free association is another red herring, the whole point is to remove the criminal from the rest of society, it does not deny that the prisoner is still a part of that society. Taking a democratic vote away does that and I think it’s best to treat the criminal as separate but still a part of society rather than deny their existence.
That’s why.
That would be discussion not sicussion (whatever that is!)
Seriously - on prisoners voting…
I think that many prisoners have probably never voted. They don’t really mind the fact that the right to vote has been taken away, as it is one they never used when they were at liberty. (Don’t forget that a huge number are functionally illiterate - do the illiterate have high turnout rates in elections?)
The great British voting public may regard it as important that prisoners are denied the right to vote, but don’t realise of how little significance this is to many prisoners. If prisoners were allowed to vote, I doubt many would bother anyway. And if a few, who never voted when on the outside, did actually bother, it would be a good thing, as it would be part of a process of rehabilitating them into society.
I think it is reasonable for prisoners to regain the vote after a certain proportion of their sentence has passed.
And if is shown that they are more likely to vote LD than any other party, hell, give them five votes…
98 “And if is shown that they are more likely to vote LD than any other party, hell, give them five votes…”… And presumably to alleviate fears that their vote would be decisive in some constituencies, we should introduce PR??
87. I was 13! I was quite apolitical at that age, so have no idea who I would have voted for! I had some respect for Paddy, but I think that was mainly because he had been a Royal Marine…
99 - the last sentence was a joke, and a test to see if anybody made it to the end - thank you for reading that far.
Of course, all those prisoner votes in Lab /Con marginals in Kent would be useless to the LDs… so your suggestion of PR is most kind. As an alternative, since the number of prisoners is roughly equal to a constituency, perhaps they could have their own representative…
101. There’s some good radical thinking! Don’t agree with you, but hey, its the thinking that counts!
And on that merry note I’m off to buy food and revise…
01 - Maybe Jonathan Aitken would like to stand……..
85, 88 - Yes Dartmoor Prison is in West Devon, but who is to say that given the vote they will vote for the Liberal Democrats - you’ll have to try harder than that to win the seat back
102 Good luck Tistoph!
101 I’m glad that you’ve seen the flaw in giving prisoners five votes each… Of course benefit to the LDs should be the primary consideration when thinking of altering voting legislation
VOTE FOR ADOLESCENTS!!!!
PR WITH DOUBLE REPRESENTATION FOR CORNWALL AND WESTERN SCOTLAND!!!
SBS-98
‘And if is shown that they are more likely to vote LD than any other party, hell, give them five votes…’
After the events of the past few weeks New Labour would undoubtedy win all prisoners votes,no conteast!
Tistoph,
Best of luck with your exams.
Tony is in Tuscany.
The Sunday Times political editor rang me up earlier to do a story about the deputy leadership. I declined to comment much myself but suggested he have a look at the website, so Mike may find the site quoted tomorrow.
84: International development *is* a major issue with a significant minority in Broxtowe, Tistoph - I have a mailing list of (IIRC) 750 homes who’ve asked for regular updates on the issue, and there is a long list of constituents who voted for me because of Labour’s record on this despite vehemently disagreeing over Iraq. I get lots more letters on development than on education or council tax, for instance, though I’m sure most people would feel these more important. Like animal welfare, it’s one of those niche issues that will actually change votes for maybe 5% of the population (who are also among the keenest letter-writers) while most people only have the vaguest interest. But 5% of switchers (albeit on the Lib-Lab axis rather than the Lab-Con one) is a lot in a marginal seat.
Fred - I was never a Trotskyist in the 80s or any other time. I was a Communist in my teens.
Prisoners/resident mental patients: Labour has alweays been nasty to the LDs on this (which is no doubt why Ming has changed it), but I’ve never been sure. I take the point about ‘forfeiting the right to have a say’, but I’m still unsure. isn’t it significant that two of the institutions which have most often been criticised in the past, prisons and closed mental hospital wings, are the two where the residents have no vote? I actually think the case for voting is stronger for mental patients (despite the obvious cheap jokes). Plenty of mental difficulties don’t affect political judgment. I have a constituent who has an extreme obsessive-compulsive disorder that led her voluntarily to be sectioned in hospital. She’s intelligent, well-informed, and has never done anyone any harm. Why shouldn’t she vote, perhaps for whichever party offers most commitment to mental health services?
In response to the question about how many LDs hated this prisonner votes policy there were tonnes, myself included, on this board. That is probably the main reason it has been killed.
SBS is quite right, prisoners belong hugely disproportionately to those groups in society who don’t vote anyway (if they do certainly don’t vote LD ironically).
I think ukpaul, whilst having a valid point about how you sort serious enough from the not serious enough to be disenfranchised, is taking a very extreme view of liberalism.
It is certainly not allowing people to do what they hell they like regardless of the consequence to others. The fact that some LDs have interpreted it thus is what has got us into so much trouble in the past. I take my hat off to Ming and Nick for shaving off the beards and losing the sandals at last.
BTW I am absolutely convinced this was the single biggest vote loser the LDs had at the last election, and I congratulate the Labour spin machine on finding its most repellent expression.
I had it raised literally hundreds of times by voters on the doorstep and otherwise - far more so than any other issue by a factor of at least 4 (immigration second!).
PS How many Labour MPs have the surname Knight?
111. sitting MPs? I think just Jim Knight from Dorset South. Then there’s Greg Knight, but he’s a a tory
112 - and then there’s Tony “seven times a NIGHT” Blair…
I can’t see Ming’s latest pronouncement making a great deal of difference. The Lib Dems will never be able to outbid the Tories or Labour when it comes to being perceived as tough on crime. And at the same time it may alienate some of their current support. After all a number of Liberals on this site have seemed to suggest that ditching unpopular policies in order to appeal to the electorate in unpricipled and opportunistic. I have no doubt they will be suitably outraged by recent developments!
113.
Considering that asking the type of underwear they wear is now a common question for politicians, I’m wondering if asking how time they could do it each night will become a common question for MPs wives.
And the Libdems will be in a weak position again…because the question could be followed with another one about the use of V….a
The rise of the Conservatives is likely to take us back more to two party politics. The same way that their decline helped the Libdems and others to rise.
Labour’s decline has also allowed the Libdems and others to rise but that was against a backdrop of the Conservatives not being able to win.
Now the Tories are back, Libdem and others voters will move back towards either the Conservatives or Labour.
“Go back to your Constituencies and prepare for… a Libdem massacre!”
Welcome to the forum, RedSky, and congratulations on a very well written and interesting début. One question though. Are you sure there is really going to be this much interest in taking up a position that, if current trends persist, probably means being Deputy Leader of the Official Opposition after the next election?
Thanks Andrea… I was hoping there would be an A.T. Knight.
Welcome RedSky. We’re not all Tories here! Keep it up!
If I understand it correctly: Cameron shows his brilliance by changing longstanding Tory policy and by saying the opposite of the things he put in the manifesto he wrote just last year. If Campbell discusses changes in Lib Dem policy, he just proofs he’s desperate.
The results of the May 4th local elections and of the local by-elections held since then are hardly proof of a coming Lib Dem massacre.
120 - Life is such is a b*tch
Re female candidates for the dep leadership. I don’t really get the impression that there is much affection for the leading labour women in the country at large. Whether it be for Patricia Hewitt, Harman or Blears. Would be interesting to see a poll of men and women giving their views on these potential candidates.
“But we will not seriously tackle crime unless we get to grips with why criminals are criminals.”
It’s because they’re villains, sir.
122 - I’m not sure if that lack of affection is particular to Labour women or indeed Labour politicians. It’s hard to think of any leading politician today for whom the public have much affection - Ken Clarke and Charles Kennedy perhaps but thats about it.
110. I agree, Jon. I have been always been uncomfortable with our inclusion of criminals in among the groups usually associated with the “equality” agenda.
It is good sense to neutralise the “Lib Dems soft on crime” argument, following on from our commitment not to raise the overall tax burden which neutralises the “Lib Dems high tax” argument.
It will be much more pleasant for the Lib Dems on the doorsteps in future.
Max,
If the argument is that labour should have a balanced ticket, because of the electoral beneift, it would be useful to know what women (who are supposed to be more attracted to labour as a result of a female dep leader) thought of the possible candidates.
My thoughts are that, while they would in principle in be in favour, they have little time for the potential candidates.
Alex Durham
Cameron said KGB wanted to recruit him:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5021166.stm
They probably passed him away, because his changes of mind jappned to easily…
Scottish posters, could some of you explain me this headline:
http://northtonight.grampiantv.co.uk/content/default.asp?page=s1_1_1&newsid=8889
I thought Fergus was already the MP there and so he’s not exactly replacing Margaret.
228 - I think it’s just wrong Andrea as you say he’s allready the sitting MSP.
127 - Andrea, perhaps those guys just chatted him up?
130. Tabman, maybe they just wanted to bed him and his friend!
127 He didn’t say that they failed.
“It’s because they’re villains, sir.”
And jailbirds, sir.
228 As Max has pointed out, he is the existing MSP for the seat - whoever put that headline up should start to read a bit more.
132. Jonathan, you’re a point!
But I still think they just wanted to bed him. A young man on a beach stopped by 2 men who took him on a dinner….uhm, well, an attempt…of cruising!
129/134. Marcia/Max. thanks. I was wondering if it was him who missed something or Grumpian TV writers being already on holidays with their minds!
130 Tabbers, You know, when I read that story, I immediately thought of you and “Commie-Ron” :). And suddenly you appear after a protracted disappearance. All rather odd, and mildly disconcerting…
136 - Grampian TV 1961 - 2006 RIP from Tuesday
STV from then
138. is Grampian tv closing?
Taken over by Glasgow based STV a while ago and now getting rid of our local TV identity -
should be
:(
61 ‘No-one has a fundamental right to a vote; it is something earned as a valued member of society. It is entirely right that people who flout society’s laws should lose that priviledge while they are being punished.’
OK so lets take the right to vote from people who have flouted society’s laws and been punished by losing their driving licence. Do they have a fundamental right to vote?
SSP pantomime continues
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/5023794.stm
http://www.scottishsocialistparty.info/
marcia - Do you still have regional ITV up there? Carlton abolished our local television identity, Westcountry, ages ago - 1999 IIRC. Now of course even Carlton’s gone and is completely 100% ITV
142 - if they are to have a vote - why not a postal vote in their home constituency - not that I can forsee many will in interested in voting or politics. It is a sad fact that many can barely read or write.
143. Marcia, thanks for the Grampian TV news.
I think SSP likes to push the self-destroy button! They’re building a sort of political soap opera based on Sheridan alleged shags!
Marcia - it could be worse you could get Border. For some reason the village I live in was the only place in the Borders that got Scottish. But most of my friends from School got Border and amongst other travesties was the fact they’d show Carlisle United games whilst the rest of the country got the Old Firm game!
On the other hand I suppose I missed out by never having my name mentioned on Border Birthdays.
144 - We had a very good regional TV station up here, just like you had Westward then TSW. Alas when the Grampian shareholders sold out to Scottish TV all we had was the name only. All in-vision announcers disappeared and we had remote announcements from Glasgow. A lot of our local popular programmes disappeared through the years. SMG the parent company has decided to get rid of Scottish TV and Grampian TV identity - so from Tuesday is is STV - we do not use ITV1 up here as it is not owned by Granda/Carlton. At least one programme from Aberdeen will survive - North Tonight.
I agree with nearly all lib dem policy but i have always struggled with the prisioners vote thing. Not because its unpopular (which it was) but because it seems illogical. If someone has committed a crime so serious as to deprived liberty then why get so upset about voting? It just seems bizzare to say its ok for the state to control every other aspect of your life but some how voting is in a catergory of its own. I don’t really buy the rehabilitation argument either. Its the kind of well ment knee jerk liberalism that the party conference probably voted for on a wet tuesday afternoon in brighton. Let me be frank, its that kind of impulse that makes me a member but on this occassion I’m glad its gone.
for those looking for the old day of British TV - there are snippets on elections/news programmes.
Health Warning - you can spend hours on this site.
http://www.tv-ark.org.uk/
I think the traditional regional identitles of the main Scottish, Welsh and NI