Why is John Reid still second favourite?
January 26th, 2007
Can a Home Secretary ever make it to the top job?
The above, reproduced from the Sun web-site, gives a good flavour of how John Reid is being treated this morning following a whole raft of new problems on his patch. His cabinet position, surely, is not for ambitious high flyers and it is hard to see how he can progress from here.
But why is he still second favourite almost right across the board to take the to job. This does not add up. If, for whatever reason, Gordon does not make it then it is not going to be Reid.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Why is he still second favourite almost right across the board to take the to job? Because there’s no-one else. He at least looks like a heavyweight and has been ‘tested’ in a number of major departments. He’s not standing up to the test at the Home Office very well, but then who does?
The real question is not so much why is he second favourite, but why are his odds between 11/2 and 13/1? Realistically, I can’t see a good reason why he should be less than 20/1. Gordon is still too short on the exchanges - though about right with the bookies.
If Reid wasn’t second favourite, who would be? Benn? Miliband? Johnson? Are these really people who could be PM in a few months? I’m far from convinced.
I understood Reid had made it pretty clear to anyone at last years Labour Conference that he didn’t want the job, not as political spin but genuinely.
The damage done to his leadership chances over the last few days are terminal.
Perhaps thats why he looks so happy.
Reid is dead meat.
If Brown goes under a bus then Labour will jump over the senior ministers to Milliband or Benn.
Perhaps Nick Palmer and Stewart Jackson would care to estimate how many MPs in each of their parties actually have a burning ambition to become Home Secretary
There’s a rather beautiful irony in Reid being brought down by the same reactionary media that he’s been manipulating since taking the job.
And this shows once again how it is Brown has held on for so long. It’s impossible to become unpopular if your fingerprints are never found on a policy unless it’s as technocratic as Bank of England independence or as saintly as debt-relief to Africans. No wonder he resisted Blair’s half-hearted attempts to move him from the Treasury to another great office of state.
As Mary Ann Sieghart says in today’s Times in reference to the next premier’s utter radio silence over gay adoption: “Mr
Brown is prime ministerial when he wants to be, but his instinct to run away from toxic issues is as strong as ever”.
Frankley I think Michael Howard is now more likely to lead the Labour party than John Reid.
The Home office has always been a bit of a tricky department, but we are no just in serial cock up territory. I don’t see John Reid lasting a fortnight in the job, but other junior ministers need to go as well.
Mind you, with the Home office budget being part if the problem, I suspect Gordon will get some blowback as well.
6.”As Mary Ann Sieghart says in today’s Times in reference to the next premier’s utter radio silence over gay adoption: “Mr
Brown is prime ministerial when he wants to be, but his instinct to run away from toxic issues is as strong as ever””
Shouldn’t Mary Ann Sieghart being also concerned her Dave (who doesn’t even have a position at the moment) too regarding the gay adoption row (being one of his cheerleaders in chief)?
(from the Evening Standard of 2 days ago): “Tory leader David Cameron stayed silent on the issue yesterday. His spokesman said he supported gay adoption but had not yet come to a view on whether Catholic agencies should be given an exemption.”
4
OTOH if we were to have the Liberals in government after the GE, I would have thought any Liberal worth his or her salt would jump at the post, provided s/he controls policy.
It is the office from which one can do most to enhance our civil liberties, (with or without legislative time). It’s just possible, I suppose, that the programme of a truly Liberal Home Office might attract the odd adverse comment from the Mail or the Sum, but those are known in the trade as battle honours.
8 Andrea How refreshing, a politician who does not feel he has to give an InstaQuote and admits he is still thinking about it.
8 - “Tory leader David Cameron stayed silent on the issue yesterday. His spokesman said he supported gay adoption but had not yet come to a view on whether Catholic agencies should be given an exemption.”
Translated as ‘He’s waiting to see what the focus groups tell him’
Great comment on the issue here: http://eatenbymissionaries.blogspot.com/
9. I’m sorry, I thought I read that you were suggesting Liberals in Government.
Now that would be some political comeback, the Liberal Party is three beardy blokes in a pub in Liverpool.
http://www.liberal.org.uk/
10. Rent-a-Quoted. I would have thought you could have gone in his help and rent one of your quotes
Andrea It is because I know the sordid nature of the Instaquote politicians and spinners that I welcome a rather more considered and unforced approach.
14. Rent-a-Quote, anyway my point was toward Mary Ann Sieghart’s point scoring toward GB because he didn’t say what he thinks about the issue, whilst at the some time she’s not concerned at all about DC doing the same thing.
A bit of double standard here…if Brown should let us know his opinions about it (and I would like to hear it, btw), DC should do the same. If GB is not Prime Minister material for doing so, DC isn’t either.
Btw, I think John Reid has come out against the opt out (according the Telegraph)
I said a couple of weeks ago on here that it was over for Reid after the crimes committed overseas issue. Just one step issue too far
It there was any doubt, its surely gone now.
12. Some nice quotes on that website -
‘Since the merger of 1988, the socialist parentage of the Liberal Democrats has become more and more noticeable’
‘Liberal Democracy is simply Social Democracy in all but name’
16. I’m increasingly wondering that with 24 hour media and freedom on information, is nearly impossible to make a political success of being Home Secretary?
Morning all :). I think the Home Office is and always been a poisoned chalice. When you consider that both Jenkins and Clarke served in that post and were denied the top jobs it makes you wonder.
I was concerned by Reid’s proposal to split the Home Office into two. it is superficially attractive but unfortunately forgets that Security and Justice are not mutually exclusive, Far from it - in a liberal democracy, we have to balance the need for security against the operation of law and order and civil liberties. A “Minister of (Homeland) Security” is far too Orwellian for my liking. Such a post may enjoy the trappings of control too much and might forget that the civil liberties of which we are justly proud shouldn’t simply be sacrificed on the altar of security.
I also think the Home Office has become too large because, as with other Government functions, it has siphoned powers and responsibility from local Government.
I accepted Marcus’s challenge a couple of days ago and had a look at Nick Hurd’s Sustainable Communities Bill. It’s a good piece of legislation and a start which is possibly why it has attracted such strong cross-party support. My reservation is that this should be the start of the journey, not the end. I am encouraged by Marcus and some of the other thoughtful Tories on here who recognise the need to decentralise power back to communities.
I am increasingly of the view that should the Conservatives be the largest party in the next HoC and Cameron leads a minority Government (as I think very likely) then even though he will not have to worry about defeat on motions of confidence, the fact remains legislation will need to be enacted which will mean securing either a Labour abstention or seeking LD (and other party) support to create a majority.
There are areas such as civil liberties, the environment and decentralisation where I suspect a body of common ground exists. Though I know a formal Coalition is out of the question (and rightly so), do the thoughtful Tories consider it conceivable that negotiations between the Conservatives and LDs would be possible with a view to creating mutually agreed legislation on areas of common interest ? Obviously not before the next GE but in a situation as I have described.
I am increasingly tempted to think that the prison over crowding is a deliberate ploy by the labour so that when they all get convicted over the cash for honours scandal they wont go to prison because their wont be any places.
[20] If BFG stands for Big Friendly Ghost, I don’t want to meet an Unfriendly one …
[19] That would be nice, if only there were any evidence that the average local Council was more fit for purpose than the average Home Secretary
17. The blog there is funny, too.
Frozen in time like it’s author I suspect - it stops in May 2004.
“We’re not dead ye….”
For those interested in EU Parliament internal manoeuvres. The German CDU is set to lose the chairmanship of Foreign Affairs Committee. A Polish (always from EPP group. It was an internal thing between German and Polish delegations within the EPP) should get it.
Tory Giles Chichester will lose the Industry, Research and Energy committee chairmanship though and he should be replaced by a CDU MEP. The tories will get Agricolture Committee chairman though (with Neil Parish).
The EPP should also get the chairmanship of Budgets (German CDU), Regional Development (Spain’s PP), Legal Affairs (Italy’s Forza Italia), Environment (ODS, Czech Republic) Women’s rights and gender equality (Slovakia’s KDH) and Security&Defence (CDU) committees.
The Soc*alists should get chairs of seven committees: Internal trade, Economic and monetary affairs, Employment, Internal market, culture, Constitutional affairs and Budgetary control. The Liberals should take Transport and Tourism, Civil Liberties and Fisheries. The Greens should take the Human Rights committee chair. UEN (Europe of Nations) grpup and UEN and GUE (the far left) group should get one committee each (I think International Development will go to the far left)
BBCi reporting the head of the Youth Justice Board has quit “Prof Morgan attacked Labour’s young offenders policy and said children’s prisons were being “swamped”. Think Reid has absolutely no chance now.
19. “I think the Home Office is and always been a poisoned chalice. When you consider that both Jenkins and Clarke served in that post and were denied the top jobs it makes you wonder” - IIRC, there were over 40 Home Secretaries during the 20th century, of whom only two became PM - not a very good success rate. And those two (Churchill and Callaghan) had lengthy gaps between their service there and becoming PM.
Re 24, Ted *cough* I think you vastly overestimate John Reid’s chances
Anyone think JRs job might be in danger ?
Re 27, Jamie, yes me I said so in my blog here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2007/01/home-office-in-meltdown-john-reid-to.html
I have not as yet updated my blog with the latest fiascos because as woon as I get 5 minutes to type something up, 3 more c*ck ups come to light
If Nick Palmer is reading, how did the vote on jury trials in “complex fraud trials” go?
PA reports:
Tories snatched their first council by-election gain of the year, taking a Nottinghamshire County Council seat in Labour’s former Hucknall stronghold.
Their candidate Michael Murphy won in a division that covers nearly a third of the the crucial Sherwood constituency which they would need to capture to achieve an overall Commons majority next time.
His triumph comes after his party failed to field a runner to defend an Ashfield District Council seat in the area last July.
Independent Eric Jones gained from Plaid Cymru at Llanfihangel Esceifiog, Isle of Anglesey County Council.
Tories kept overall control of New Forest District Council, Hampshire, despite a big swing to Liberal Democrats at Barton.
There was a boost for Conservatives in leader David Cameron’s Witney home base.
They comfortably held a Witney Central seat, with Labour forced from second place to a poor third behind Liberal Democrats.
Analysis of four comparable results in January suggest a projected 18.5% Tory lead over Labour, with barely three months to crucial marathon mid term Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and English council elections.
The overall Conservative margin was boosted by Labour’s collapse in Mr Cameron’s constituency.
RESULTS:
Cumbria County - Brampton and Gilsland: C 717, Lab 363, BNP 88. (May 2005 - C 1370, Lab 809, Lib Dem 689). C hold. Swing 5.4% Lab to C.
Isle of Anglesey County - Llanfihangel Esceifiog: Ind 449, Plaid Cymru 273, Lab 56. (June 2004 - Plaid Cymru 558, Ind 323). Ind gain from Plaid Cymru.
New Forest District - Barton: C 990, Lib Dem 426, Ind 277, Lab 48. (May 2003 - Two seats C 1261, 1255, Lib Dem 452, 378). C hold. Swing 9% C to Lib Dem.
Nottinghamshire County - Hucknall: C 1597, Lab 1554, Lib Dem 1007, Ukip 413, Green 350. (May 2006 - Three seats Lab 6619, 6576, 6566, C 4278, 4125, 3824, Green 1540, 1320, 1149, Ind 854, 742). C gain from Lab. Swing 10.2% Lab to C.
West Oxfordshire District - Witney Central: C 417, Lib Dem 207, Lab 87, Green 68. (June 2004 - C 524, Lab 339, Lib Dem 217, Green 142). C hold. Swing 0.9% Lib Dem to C.
end
Re 29, Richard, thanks for that.
The real polls seem not to match the opinion polls.
1 - David, by your reasoning, Gordon is not too short on the exchanges - if you make the second favourite 20/1 (c. 5%) and also claim there’s “no-one else” (charitably allowing another 3-4% across the field, say) then Gordon Brown has about a 91% chance of winning = 1/10 = 1.10
You can hardly say it comes down to two individuals and then claim they are both too short in a 100% book!
31. well, it depends. I think that if the Hucknall election had not been held on GE day in 2005, Labour would have won it with a less big margin and so the swing would have looked less big now.
The Cumbria swing is in line with opinion polls: a 5% swing compared to 2005 is what the polls are giving us.
33 But where have the LibDem candidates gone in some of these contests?
28. BW - IMHO you should change the font or typeface on your blog - it makes my eyes screw up - but that’s just me.
Can we interpret this as Darth Murdoch reluctantly coming out for Brown? I suspect so… It could also be an attempt to weaken Reid so that he cant split the Home Office, though I dont know why ‘The Emperor’ would object to that.
Also, seems like the attack on Barak Obama’s name and heritage has started already:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/26/wobama26.xml
We all knew it would happen. And we all knew that people in Fox News would pick it up and run with it gleefully. This is why I doubt he can do it.
12: Marcus - LOL
Mike: You have an HTML tag poking out of the bottom of that story.
34. they were absent in Cumbria (and in the Welsh byelection where they weren’t present last time too), but they fielded a candidate in Ashfield (doing well) where they weren’t present in 2005.
Has anyone in the last century moved from the Home Office to No. 10? (Genuine question.)
37 Andrea Have you any idea why they were absent in Cumbria. There has been LibDem boasting about their powers there recently since Collins lost his seat, if I recall?
38 - the only ones I can see who had been Home Secretary are Callaghan and Churchill, but in both cases that was some time (6 / 29 years respectively) before they became PM.
37 There is another joint byelection to come in Cumbria and Carlisle DC caused by the death of a LibDem councillor and this caused them not to contest this election .
40/38 Asquith as well I think - a large number had been President of Board of Trade &/or Foreign Sectretary.
40 - Can someone give a list of where PM’s have come from. Clearly the most frequent preceding post is Leader of the Opposition, but I wonder what the alternatives have been?
25. David, illuminating statistic’s on how many former Home Office Minister’s have managed to go on to become PM.
27.”Anyone think JRs job might be in danger ?” As Tony Blair’s “Mr Fix it” he looks about as safe as his boss at the moment. Will Reid go when Blair step’s down?
re 38. Well Tony Blair was Shadow Home Secretary before getting the leadership in 1994 and Jim Callaghan was Home Secretary from 1967-1970. He became PM in 1976.
So no direct move.
41. Mark, do you think it was a good idea not to run a candidate at all (not even a paper candidate)? I suppose they could have had a chance to overtake Labour and become the main challengers. However they would have probably needed some campaign to do so (not sure if Labour run a decent campaign or not though)
32. Yes, you’re quite right. I wrote the comment quickly before I came to work and I didn’t proof check it. I should have said that the exchanges were still offering value on GB, whereas the bookies were about right at 1/10. The comment doesn’t really make sense otherwise. Thanks for pointing it out.
OT. on this adoption issue an observant poster on the lovely Slugger O’Toole forum has referenced a possible compromise as set out by Geoff Hoon last night.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni/2007/01/adopting_a_compromise.html
Is thsi enough to keep those ministers who have set their face against an opt out happy?
46 As an outsider , then yes I would have preferred to run a paper candidate rather than none at all but I think the death of the LibDem councillor in another ward came at just the wrong tome ( if there is ever a right time ) .
This is a couple of days old, but I did not see it posted then.
http://the-daily.org/2007/01/21/labour-councillors-at-almost-30-year-low/
Back to 1978 level. Could be worse after May when losses are predicted (on here) to be a further drop of 500 to 1,000.
“News that the number of Labour councillors is at its lowest level since the 1970s.
The figures, released by Jon Cruddas’s campaign, show that the current number of Labour councillors is 6,105 compared to 8,482 for the Tories and 4,708 for the Lib Dems. This amounts to 28% of the total for Labour, the lowest since 1978, when Labour held 26%.
The news shows the growing crisis in Labour’s membership. Local councillors are both a crucial voluntary resource for the party and they often make the bridge between the general public and government.
Although this is not as bad as the Tories’ position in 1996, it is a large dip in Labour’s fortunes, as Labour has lost 4,503 since coming to power in 1997.”
The Chancellor of the Exchequer is responsible for taxes and recessions; it is not immediately clear why that post is less of a poisoned chalice than Home Secretary.
It makes you wonder whether the ITV/Mail cash-for-honours email story — where the only news content was months old — was a failed attempt to bury Reid’s bad news.
43 - This is purely guesswork (and not checked) but:
Major – Chancellor
Callaghan - Foreign Sec
Home - Foreign Sec
Macmillan - Chancellor
Eden - Foreign Sec
Chamberlain - Chancellor
Baldwin (1935) - Lord Privy Seal ?
Baldwin (1922) - Board of Trade?
Lloyd George - Munitions
Asquith - Chancellor
Balfour - Leader, House of Commons
52, Ooops, Baldwin was Chancellor in 1922 - just checked in Wikipedia
Alec Douglas-Hume, Pm 1963-4.
Took over a scandel ridden Government,and did not loose by too much, to the bright new, white heat of technology , Harold Wilson.
Is there a lesson here.
Also was any cash involved, regarding the Lordship in taking this role?
51. The government is in crisis with a leader who has no authority left. When you have the military, police and the judiciary openly questioning the policy of government in this way, then I think that we have a melt down situation.
This was the attempted “bury bad news” headline that the Home Office was trying to use to divert attention away from the current crisis, I think the similar tactic used on Saturday night to float separating the Home Office had some success.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6300725.stm
I personally cannot thing of any circumstances in which Alan Milburn could possibly become the next Labour leader. He is unpopular with the party, and has in recent months been busy alienating most of the PLP.
50. Yes I saw that. It may well be that if the May elections go very badly for Labour then it could actually have quite an impact on the deputy leadership vote.
If I were a longstanding Labour councillor (or had been campaigning for one) that had been unseated due to national events out of my control, then I’d be pretty hacked off and inclined to vote for Cruddas as the ‘change candidate’. On the other hand if results aren’t as bad as feared nationally and people respond warmly to the prospect of Brown replacing Blair, then Hazel Blears as Party Chair could be significantly boosted as the ‘continuity candidate’.
57. HenryG. Can I take the following comment by Hewittt on Harman’s website as a vote for Harriet:
“I am keen to see Harriet Harman as Deputy Prime Minister. Her experience in a Southern Constituency and as a woman in the Labour Party will bring a unique and complementary approach to Gordon Brown’s leadership. It is clear from opinion surveys that the combination of Gordon Brown as leader and Harriet Harman as deputy will give us the strongest appeal in particular to women and swing voters and Harriet’s wealth of campaigning experience and strong communication skills will be particularly valuable for our next election campaign”
Is she the first Cabinet Minister to signal potential support for a deputy candidate (apart those who are running and supporting themself!)?
57. What Harriet fails to realise is that the election is for Deputy Leader and not Deputy Prime Minister. Her second mistake is to believe that having Patricia Hewitt endorsing you is a good thing. Yes Andrea, I think she is the first to break ranks.
Blair has managed to destroy the Labour Party in the long term. I know plenty of former Labour party members who absolutely despise Blair because he has destroyed the party that they joined i.e working class, socialist and trade union backed. These people are the people who in the end you need to win an election ie sfuffing envelopes, delivering leaflets, canvassing ete. And the simple case is that these people have no intention of rejoining Labour.
60. Mark I agree that such people do make a huge difference at an election time on all sides. Academics Pat Seyd and Paul Whiteley have covered this quite a bit in the past. There are those close to Blair that you now only need a ‘virtual party’ of supporters and that private companies can deliver leaflets and professional telephone canvassers can be employed. To be honest that’s a frightening vision for me, but it’s the way it’s been going over the last few years.
Mark Goodair’s previous posts haven’t been very friendly, so I wouldn’t take this one as an expression of friendly concern. Labour wins when it has a broad coalition, and having working-class socialist support and volunteers willing to stuff envelopes is not sufficient, as we saw in 1979-92. We are obviously at a low ebb at the moment, but it’s simply too soon to predict even 6 months ahead. Equally anecdotally to Mark’s friends, I know seven people who plan to rejoin Labour imnmediately that the leadership changes.
61. A sure fire way of becoming out of touch with your electorate. however, that is not to say that members of any particular party are always necessarily in touch with reality!
Re 62, Nick Palmer, on your point there we will have to wait and see.
How did the vote go?
There seems to be a real paucity of candidates for leadership should Labour go into opposition. As with the Tories in 1997 and 2001 it really could be anyone.
59. Henry, she also has the endorsement of Hodge and I think it’s even worse than having Hewitt backing you. And naturally she also has Oona King as one of her main cheerleaders.
Glenis Kinnock is also backing Harriet.
66. Hodge? Really? That’s an endorsement to keep quiet about. I see from this weeks New Stateman interview Harriet got a bit of criticism particularly in contrast to their praise for Peter Hain:
‘…for all this talk of a new openness, Harman often comes across as cautious and wooden. Time and again we ask her to say what she really thinks, to say what she and Gordon Brown would actually do - you never know, to take some risks. When we raise, in passing, the strong media coverage Peter Hain received for his interview with us last week, Harman’s body language suggests a combination of disdain and possibly fear. On those big issues about which Hain spoke with such frankness, she is all evasiveness.’
67. HenryG. “We need Harriet as Deputy Leader to help Gordon Brown win the next General Election for Labour” Margaret Hodge MP
I suppose all candidates will get endorsements that they should probably keep quiet about.
Alan Johnson has Beverley Hughes, Peter Hain has Shaun Woodward (and the butler, I suppose), Jon Cruddas is probably hoping not to get too many far, far, far leftists openly endorsing him.
I think the Sun is spot on with “Brainless.” There can’t be much in the way of intelligence when things are such a mess, entirely down to a lack of competence and principles.
Yes, the Home Office is a poison chalice, but not just for brainless men driven by vanity, but for the entire nation. We all pick up the pieces from the mess they create.
Those Blair sycophants who talk about winning the next election, think winning is only about elections, ignoring the human suffering or death their distasterous period of office is causing to millions of people. That is a price they think is worth paying to tickle their brainless vanity.
68. I’m sure he’s very relieved the prospect of an enthusiastic endorsement from Claire Short has disappeared.
70.
Maybe he can’t avoid Walter Wolfgang endorsing him “yes, I like that Cruddas chap. He reminds me of when I was young in the Labour Party, at some point of Middle Age” 
70. Actually Henry, the worrying thing is that the fact that Clare isn’t in the party anymore won’t stop her from voicing her opinion anyway
53 - John I’m shocked you can’t remember the position of a man you helped elect!
68 - Andrea the Scottish Tories list rankings should be out fairly soon. The ballot papers had to be in by noon today although I’m not sure exactly when they start counting.
And with the recent events in the world of Scottish Politics I’ll be going canvassing in Barlinnie this weekend - if you don’t hear from me for a while get someone to alert a prison gaurd!
71. I can’t imagine Walter Wolfgang being young. They’ll agree on trident if nothing else.
73. Thanks Max.
Mark Goodair: Labour gave up on stuffing envelopes and delivering leaflets years ago. They pay people to do that now, which is why they need big money for elections. They also pay for telephone bank canvassing. The only thing they still do themselves is door canvassing, for which they have a small number of young, smiling, upper-middle class “Sophie and George” type torch carriers, and a pool of old party die-hards who do it for the party rather than for Blair. Mostly they rely on Royal Mail delivered high-quality glossy leaflets to every household, and individually addressed Royal Mail delivered printed letterheads to voters, usually signed with a personal message by some gullible public figure, like Stephen Fry, etc. The Tories are also moving to this; and this is how elections are now fought in the US. The Lib Dems are trying to move that way, but will always be at a major disadvantage because they cant afford to use mail postage.
So Harman has Hodge, Hewitt and Oona King as public supporters? Dear Lord! All she needs now to utterly sink her campaign is for Lembit to back her!
76. Mboy, I think she also has Martin Salter
MBoy - That all sounds quite dreadful. Surely we’d be best off with strict spending limits to prevent such “professionalisation” of electioneering and a return to relying on “ordinary people” to talk to other ordinary people about how they are going to vote?
New Labour appear to have their head stuck in the sands with this, terrified at the prospect of the previous 10 years catching up with them inthe form of reduced membership and reduced big-money donations.
The Tories appear to have decided to play it in a very partisan way by using it as an opportunity to bash the Unions’ links with the Labour party.
As normal, the Lib Dems appear to have a serious does of stage fright whenever they might be able to have an effect by doing something contentious [cf Trident]. Either that or I’m unfairly maligning them because the media have completely ignored them [cf Most of the Time].
It’s a rum do, that’s for sure.
76. The Tories have been doing this for some time MBoy. Bearwood Corporate Services was used by Michael Ashcroft to flood marginals with cash in the run up to the 2005 election. The loot was used on targeted mailing and telephone canvassing.
79. HenryG. Since I seem to recall you were quite expert of North East area, what do you think of upcoming Labour selections there (now that open and AWS have been decided)? Since Sunderland Central is AWS, how many chances does Sharon Hodgson have to resurface there? How many chances has Taylor-Gooby in Easington? And will there some ultra-blairites trying there (teh varius advisors and co allegedly touring some seats in previous months)?
79.Lib Dems are setting up a national call centre:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/13/nlibdems13.xml
80. For Easington my money is on Mike Routledge. He’s a local councillor who is also the political officer for Amicus in the North East. Very well thought of. Taylor-Gooby seems a decent enough fellow, but is getting on a bit himself and I don’t think he could pull in the same backing as Routledge.
Sunderland Central will be interesting. Julie Elliott from the GMB will be in with a chance. Also heard whispers that Fiona Millar, Alistair Campbell’s wife could be interested. Sharon Hodgson is finished in my book. Her whole original selection (and reselection) campaign was around her only wanting to be an MP for Gateshead. Sunderland’s only down the road, but these things matter in Tyneside. The GMB will back Elliott over Hodgson anytime.
79. In my target marginal Michael Ashcroft ‘flooded’ us with £5,000 - not enough to do one postal mailshot.
Direct mail is VERY expensive and can only be effective when carefully targeted at floating voters in marginal seats.
Telephone canvassing gets mixed results; and often just annoys people in a way that doorstep candvassing doesn’t. These new marketing based methods are in addition to, not instead of, traditional campaigning.
What is the point of canvassing anyway if you don’t knock up on polling day?
On the gound volunteers are the backbone of an election campaign -even in the USA it is recognised that Bush won because the republicans ‘got their vote out’ below the radar on polling day thanks to their volunteers.
Don’t rush to write off the voluntters yet. Labour may not have any but we are doing fine, thanks.
82. ‘these things matter in Tyneside’
and Wearside!
Marcus: Canvass info can be used for targetting mailshots even before polling day, as you point out to floating voters, etc.
Sorry to go completely off topic, but this made me laugh and it is Friday afternoon!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/6301613.stm
Don’t think Reid ever had a real chance anyway……..I always thought of him as a bit of a Grandad figure!
He has all of Browns negatives plus ming cambells age! (Or looks it - that was not aimed at being a comment against the person - just he is well known for being a former hardedend boozer & smooker - I can relate to both!!!!)
I think Johnson although i would never vote Labour, I think he is acceptable to the major partner in the UK - England. Let’s also face facts a policy on health, prisons or any devolved matter to scotland is going to lack credability from Brown, where as Johnson at leasts faces a red rubber stamp of being elected in the Labour fifedum of one of Hull’s seats- being directly accountable for key social and policing policies.
I also think that if Johnson is PM he can use more of the talent in the PLP from scotland, whereas Brown would just excentuate his remotness from the majority of English electors if he put a fellow scot in any seior position. No Johnson for PM - Miliband for Chancellour (Is that the same milliband who use to write Macroeconomics books - I have one from my first uni course - if it is! Hope it is not his brother he has an awful screen persona - comes across as nasty! Don’t want to have lined his pockets!).
81. The Lib Dems must have seen him coming or he saw them..1 million for a call centre set up to run a surge coming up to the next GE?
They having a laugh or he is and getting it nicely off his tax….
81. The Lib Dems must have seen him coming or he saw them..1 million for a call centre set up to run a surge coming up to the next GE?
They having a laugh or he is and getting it nicely off his tax….
John Reid inherited a dogs dinner of a job which will take him, and anyone else, years to fully understand.
The rot started before the days of this Government but has been exacerbated by the addition of hundreds (thousands?) of new laws - by this Government. All the equality laws need massive monitoring: influxes from Europe and beyond: the Human Rights Acts and European law.
If he can get to grips with these problems (and he will have to hammer many prima donnas in the Civil Service and the Politically Correct movement then he will make an ideal Prime Minister.
Re 90, John somehow I doubt Reid will get the chance. The place decends into further chaos every day.
81. I presume you won’t be manning the phones, Colin?
76 Not sure you’re on the mark regarding volunteers in the Labour party. In 2005 there were plenty about. Volunteered myself in Hove, delivered a few hundred addressed letters the old fashioned way.
Volunteers made a difference.
82. Thanks HenryG.
Regarding Sunderland Central, I also thought about Julie Elliott. IIRC you mentioned her in a privious discussion. Then I read an old piece (in Sunderland local piece) about rumours of attempts to deselect Etherington to make room for her (then it didn’t happen).
Regarding Sharon Hodgson, she seems a bit confused…after her tearful loss against Clelland, the local paper reported that she was advised (even by Clelland) to try in Washington and Sunderland West (where 1/3 of her old seat will go) and she said she would have taken a decision in the new year. On LabourHome and I and a couple of others wondered if she had applied for Washington and Sunderland West when she sent back her reselection form. Now if Sunderland Central is vacant, it means that Kemp has gone for Washington and Sunderland West and Mullin for Houghton and Sunderland South. Considering it’s unlikely that they’ll lose the trigger ballot, if Hodgons has applied just for Gateshead, she has no chance for Washington and Sunderland West.
Re Millar. I read she was interested also in Holborn and St Pancrass if Dobbo goes (she and AC live in Glenda’s half of Camden)
83. Bearwood put £844,547 into Tory marginals at the last election, which is a quite a large amount of donations. I agree with you Marcus about the importance of ‘knocking up’, but I’ve detected the major parties are really encouraging postal voting these which lengthens the period of knocking up and makes it less precise.
Personally I’m amazed how much energy and resource goes into political mailshots. The amount of junk mail people receive these days must surely reduce it’s impact. Does anyone know of research on the effectiveness of different forms of political commmunication?
79. that may be the case, but instead of just accepting that marginals will be a focus of resources and deploying your own resoures there in defence, the Government is creating caps on campaign spending and then giving a £10000 per year leaflet/website budget for sitting MPs. This means that our Nick Palmer will get £10000 per year between now and the next election to spend on leaflets to his constituents telling them how lovely he has been. with a majority of only just over 2000 this is not insignificant.
Even more trouble for the Home Office with John Reid admitting today that the Goverment acted unlawfully in detaining young asylum seekers -see BBC News Website
95. Its just campaiging and the key is getting your brand and message out there in the people’s faces as much as possible. so that on election day people don;t think that you are just turning up to ask them to vote for you on the day, they have seen your material for months and hopefully years. It also does spread a message, and quite often to save cash/cost efficiency the mailings are targted, e.g. mosaic, voter vault
97. Reid has gone from one disaster to another ever since Matthew Partridge announced the other week that he had started backing him on Betfair to be next Labour leader.
By-Election Results: Thursday 25th January 2007.
Cumbria CC, Brampton and Gilsland
Con 717 (61.4; +13.6), Lab 363 (31.1; +2.9), BNP 88 (7.5; +7.5), [LD (0.0; -24.0).
Majority 354. Turnout 23.3%. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Isle of Anglesey UA, Llanfihangel Ysgeifiog
Ind 449 (57.7; +21.0), PC 273 (35.1; -28.2), Lab 56 (7.2; +7.2).
Majority 176. Turnout 50%. Ind gain from PC. Last fought 2004.
New Forest DC, Barton
Con 990 (56.9; -16.7), LD Wyn Davies 426 (24.5; -1.9), Ind 277 (15.9; +15.9), Lab 48 (2.8; +2.8).
Majority 564. Turnout 36.7%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Nottinghamshire CC, Hucknall
Con 1597 (32.5; +0.3), Lab 1554 (31.6; -18.2), LD Harry Toseland 1007 (20.5; +20.5), UKIP 413 (8.4; +8.4), Green 350 (7.1; -4.5), [Ind (0.0; -6.4)].
Majority 43. Turnout 21.2%. Con gain from Lab. Last fought 2005.
West Oxfordshire DC, Witney Central
Con 417 (53.5; +10.6), LD Brenda Churchill 207 (26.6; +8.8), Lab 87 (11.2; -16.5), Green 68 (8.7; -2.9).
Majority 210. Turnout 25.1%. Con hold. Last fought 2004.
96. Yes Jimbo, but all sitting MPs are entitled to this, so how is it unfair? I suppose if your political party wasn’t represented at Westminster you might feel most aggrieved.
I do think there is a need for MPs to be able to communicate to their constituents but there could be tighter restrictions on when they can use ‘parliamentary reports’. Many savvy MPs on all sides seem to send them out just prior to local and euro elections…
I see today that the new rolling poll has been put into electoral calcus. It gives Labour 33% and the tories about 37% - Nick Palmer looks extremley vulnerable, unfortunatly for him he looks to be out at the next GE. I think this poll is overestimating Labour support - that does not mean the tories are romping away to form a govt but give the electoral by-elections and the historical correlation to the likely results of general elections - think nick had better go on the rubber chicken circuit and get a new seat!!!
Incumbancy is always seen as an advantage but a long lived administration, where the rot has set in will inevitably take the loyal crew to the bottom with them.
96. its that they already have the opportunity to use their expenses to communicate with the public, this is a £10000 PER YEAR bonus. The incumbency factor is huge. if they are good at present they should get 3 or so constituency leaflets out a year, run a regularly updated website, have full time staff working on casework and local campaigns. You need resources to take that on and what is in fact happening is that the MPs are getting more and more in their favour to defend their seats. If this was happening the other way round (e.g. Tories in a mojority but in decline - giving their MPs extra in their budget to defend their seats i think you would cry foul too) the only people who benefit from this are the sitting MPs and printers/distributors.
While there’s no doubt that American ‘air war’ techniques (direct mail to targeted voter segments, national call centres, etc.) are gaining ground in all parties, it’s certainly not true that Labour no longer has volunteers delivering leaflets. Rather, it’s patchy: if you live in Kimberley in my patch, you’ll get a newsletter from Labour (and from the LibDems, but not the Tories, who appear totally moribund in the town) every couple of months, all hand-delivered. The branch is thriving and has raised all the funds needed for the local elections and beyond. But if you look closely it’s down to a dozen enthusiasts doing most of the work. In A.N. Other branch that I won’t name, we have a couple of lonely activists who do their best but can’t possibly deliver a regular leaflet. Overall I reckon I can get a newsletter delivered by hand to 75-80% of homes. Since 1997, an increasing proportion of the volunteers have been non-members: they prefer a semi-detached relationship with the party, but rally round when needed.
The problem about the American software-based approach which the Tories relied on so heavily in 2005 is that it takes an almost Marxist view of people’s views being determined by their demographics: if you have three bedrooms in a detached house you are a Tory target, if you are a pensioner who shops in the Co-op you are written off as Labour, etc. My subjective impression is that people are harder to categorise in Britain (and long may they stay that way).
102. I wouldn’t write Nick off just yet Martin. He’ll have a fair bit of support on this site if nothing else! A number of sympathetic posters could be deployed to very good effect.! Roger to deal with propaganda and Andrea could number-crunch key wards and streets for him. Ask not what Nick P can do for you, but what you can do for him!
The rubbish i get from my local MP, I look at and think how much better it would be to spend public funds on equiping the police, the army etc with bullet proof vests and other life sustaining equipment. The money could be used for paying for expensive drugs either. If each member of parliament spends the £10,000 then that’s nearly £7M!!! That could make a real difference to some peoples lives. I don’t think any MP can justify spending money on rubbish as they do and i challange them to say why there lititrature is more important than other critical public spending?
99. Yes, Mr.Partridge is looking more and more like a Roger-style reverse indicator.
No i think there should be a mutual ceasefire on this stuff from all parties.
I would also agree with nick on the american software - we (as a country) are just importing there lousy turnout by concentrating on a few using this software. Politics should be an on the street activity but it has fundamentaly changed. Maybe it is the lack of ideological debate or the loss of trust in the system.
Jimbo: the £10K allowance that you keep going on about doesn’t yet exist and won’t enable MPs to do anything new if and when it does. The Commons has passed a motion in principle asking the relevant committee to draft proposals for a communications allowance, to allow MPs non-partisan communications, replacing the facility that we already have to use the Incidental Expenses Provision to do the same thing. The idea is to ring-fence newsletter funding instead of allowing it to be drawn from the larger (£18K) pool for general expenses. You can argue that if it’s outrageous that MPs can write to constituents at taxpayers’ expense, but it’s far from new.
I do agree that helping MPs to communicate with constituents is helpful to them (even though it can’t be used for partisan material - this is checked by an independent office), but it’s quite hard to think of a way to avoid it that doesn’t get in the way of doing the job. Arguably it’s roughly balanced by the multi-million pound subsidy that Opposition parties get to enable them to challenge the Government: in theory this is for research etc., but in practice the Opposition probably uses it to displace funding that they’d otherwise use for research and spend it on campaigning instead.
102/106: I wouldn’t dream of doing a chicken run. They shall not pass!
In response to your challenge, it’s almost always possible to think of a more important use of public funds than any specific use - e.g. you might argue that all libraries should be closed in order to save lives with even more additional cancer facilities. But the case for MP newsletters in principle is that if you don’t have them, then almost nobody has a clue what the MP is saying and doing on their behalf, unless there is a widely-read local paper which reports it in detail. This has to be bad for democracy, and democracy is IMO worth a bit of dosh. If an MP’s newsletters are rubbish, the electorate can draw the appropriate conclusion, can’t they?
And that’s enough psoting for from me for now - getting back to work!
110. I know i keep going on about it but I do feel strongly about it. It will result directly in leaflets going through the door (not partisan - but still nice smily pics lots of name recognition) and at the same time proposing cuts on campaigning spending limits it is a bit disingenuous while MPs already have plenty at their disposal to communicate with constituents this is unnecessary. and whilst it is not in place now….it will be. When you say the Commons passed a motion i expect you mean your Government majority pushed it through. This will be 10k per year already on top of 18k incidental expenses (which is spent on office equipment/newsletters/website etc)it = a lot of publicity for sitting MP
111. Fair comment!
111.”wouldn’t dream of doing a chicken run. They shall not pass!”
and even if you want, I think you can’t do it anymore…unless you manage to lose the trigger ballot in Broxtowe (which, I suppose, is unlikely)
Now I know that the Home Office is in meltdown, Sky news reporting that Gordon Brown is supporting John Reid as “the man to sort the crisis out”!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6301125.stm
Also things are beginning to unravel in the NSH as well!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=RTYSOAPD0PVAZQFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?
The NHS blog doctor also has a worrying article.
112. just re-read what i wrote - largely uninteligible! my apologies for aforementioned rant
A very interesting political scene at this time! The problem for the govt. seems to be Blair’s leadership vaccum. It’s similar to the tories between 1993-95. It improved (for major) after that 95 leadership election, when i think most people wanted him to go.
Think it would also settle the present govt down abit, I still think a re-election extremely unlikely should GB become PM though. Cannot think what Blair thinks he is doing - it’s pointless, does he get more pension or something if he is their for 10 years. (Obviously a few extra months but huge increase?)
Brown currently has the power but not the office - funny old world!
115.Wrong link to NHS story.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=NHAVWLLE5WO5TQFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0
Why not ? He is considerably better than any of the alternatives !
This is just ‘Murdoch press bollocks’ - any of the other alternatives Johnson et al would have done the same thing, and followed the policy of THEIR own Government.
I see Nick Plamers mob have put another nail in the coffin of teh Magna Carta. *cough* more on my blog
Chris you meant this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=IF45M03UMRMEFQFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2007/01/26/nfree126.xml
111
‘But the case for MP newsletters in principle is that if you don’t have them, then almost nobody has a clue what the MP is saying and doing on their behalf, unless there is a widely-read local paper which reports it in detail. This has to be bad for democracy, and democracy is IMO worth a bit of dosh. If an MP’s newsletters are rubbish, the electorate can draw the appropriate conclusion, can’t they?’
Your arguments eeem to run along the same lines as the justification by the government for annual spending of close to £ 900 million on advertising government jobs in newspapers such as the Guardian,whereas the setting up & running of a website to advertise these same jobs would cost some £5 / 7 million, a massive saving for the taxpayer.
Similarly if MP’s need to communicate with the public then most local newspapers are desperately short of material to fill their pages, and are mostly delievered free to constitents homes;add to this an MP’s website (most of them seem to have them) would more than adequately cover this so called communication requirement.
120.Thanks Benedict, I did try twice but it kept coming up with the link from the previous page. As Andrea might remember from a link he gave me to hunky dunky’s site, it took me about 10 mins to work out the obvious!
Re 122, thats OK ChrisD, now every one go read this on the death by a thousand cuts of the magna carta
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
121/
There is a government jobs board:
http://www.careers.civil-service.gov.uk/index.asp?txtNavID=176&635132=
The civil service recruitment gateway.
They also have online applications & e-mal ones to fill in. Begs the question why spend so much money on advertising?
Local govt, can be found on jobs go public or jobcentre plus.
P.S. just been turned down for a job because they think i would have trouble communicating with lower class people, despite coming top in the assesments! I am on the dole - sick of this country!!!
A place can’t be found in prison for a peado but they can find one for a phone tapper????? Vote Labour - the criminals friend
124
‘They also have online applications & e-mal ones to fill in. Begs the question why spend so much money on advertising?’
Without it, the Guardian,which has a virtual monopoly of public sector job advertisements, would almost certainly be out of business.
re 54. If it was it would have been the other way round. Paying someone to vacate a seat in parliament.
121 - john: sorry, but no, that wouldn’t enable MPs to stay in touch with constituents:
a) Lots of constituents don’t have access to the Internet, so relying on a website excludes them
b) Many constituencies (e.g. Broxtowe) don’t have a newspaper circulated throughout the area and/or they have one that is too big to include their stuff (e.g. the Evening Standard covers London but certainly won’t include news from the MP for (say) Vauxhall)
c) Local papers are generally erratic in what they choose to include. The Kimberley Advertiser accepted the idea of a column from me, but bumped it every time in favour of adverts: after three atempts I gave up. If they do include a piece, it’ll typically be a short 500-word article.
d) Lots of people don’t read local papers at all.
Believe me, if it was easy, we’d all be doing it! As things stand, the complaint that people hear too rarely from their MPs is widespread (’I only hear from you when you want my vote’).
Jimbo: my understanding is that the £10K allowance will be the only allowance usable for newsletters - we won’t be able to use the current IEP as well, and it could well be reduced in consequence. Could be wrong - as I say, there is at present no concrete proposal on the table.
Does the word “paedophile” have any legal definition? Radio 4 used it in a headline at 6 o’clock. I was a bit surprised, as it appeared sensationalistic. But I suppose they would use the word “killer” instead of “murderer”.
re 115. beginning to unravel! They’ve been unravelling for years under the mismangement of MIlburn, Reid and Hewitt. I was joking with a colleague this morning about how the hospital was having a new floor and they’d be just about finished by 2010 when we’re about to get a new hospital - by which I mean some bankers are to get a new hospital by which their fat cats can get fatter whilst we taxpayers get lots poorer paying the mortgage on it for the next 40+ years - and the old hospital will revert to the PCT. I joked that we’re not likely to have PCTs in 3 years and will probably have gone through at least 2 reorganisations by then. Constant change and being ground down by useless targets will destroy the NHS.
If “Crash Gordon” keeps making statements like these he will allow John Reid to get the vacancy at No 10
Today, the world’s 97th sexiest man, Brown, pleaded for public workers to stick to the 2% inflation target for pay raises. He also stated this was necessary to keep borrowing costs low and the economy stable.
You see how these snakes operate. They encourage every person who has a pulse in the UK to borrow as much money as possible through mewing, credit cards, mortgages, and student loans. Once they’re all hooked he threatens them with higher IR’s, if they do not do as they are told and accept what is being dished out to them then they will be punished will higher borrowing costs. The indebted worker is snookered.
This is happening throughout anglo saxon countries.
The governments have discovered a new way of people control - debt.
Re 121, Martin Day, Could you email me with that story?
benedictmpwhite at gmail dot com
re 117
Aren’t we, with the argument over John Reid, Scottish Elections, and opt outs for Gay Adoption, in danger of a split at the top of the Labour Party based on religious values?