Could Charles Clarke be planning a kamikaze mission?
April 1st, 2007
Would the ex-home secretary provide the “heavyweight challenge”
Conscious that it is April 1st I have dismissed the Observer story “Blair: I’ll be treading the boards again” suggesting that the PM is scheduled to appear in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible at the Old Vic when he stands down.
But what of the Sunday Times report that the former home secretary, Charles Clarke, is ready to stand against Brown in order to ensure that there is a proper contest?
According to the paper what are said to be “Confidants of the former home secretary” are saying that he will put his hat into the ring if David Miliband decides not to mount a challenge. A source is quoted as saying “He intends to run a progressive campaign that will force a debate on the party’s future”.
Clarke’s purpose would be to avoid a Brown coronation and to provoke a debate on Labour’s future so that Brown would have to flesh out where he stands.
But would Clarke be able to find 44 MPs to sign his nomination? The Brown camp seems so determined that there should be no contest that Clarke might have trouble overcoming the first hurdle.
The last few days have seen prominent figures such as Peter Hain and Margaret Beckett warning other candidates off in a move designed to deter colleagues from backing any but Brown. The Sunday Times, however, believes that Clarke could find sufficient nominees.
While it is just possible to envisage a David Miliband candidature suddenly taking off it is hard to see anything other than a Clarke bid ending in total failure - but, as the paper points out, he has nothing to lose.
Clarke’s great strength is that he is a lucid and effective debater and could test Brown if there is a contest and TV debates are arranged.
In the betting the Brown price has tightened to 0.22/1
MessageSpace Advertising
At last a contest! Isn’t democracy wonderful.
What a strange irony - so much has changed in the last few weeks it is now doing Miliband more in refusing to stand. Clearly he has rising popularity.
In contrast the Beckitt’s and so on saying ‘don’t stand or else’ are creating an extremely negative impression in the public mind, putting Labour in a very bad light.
Could Clarke cause an upset? Yougov can answer us.
Clarke must know he wouldn’t win against Brown which means he needs another motive:
1. Force a debate and improve the fortunes of the party in a similar way to the Conservatives? I don’t see Labour pulling it off. I think it’ll just end badly for them.
2. Encourage other people to stand? I think this is more likely - Ming Campbell said he wouldn’t stand against Kennedy but ended up standing once a contest emerged. Can’t see Clarke winning but he could force a contest in which more people might throw their hat into the ring. Gordon might win 1 vs 1 but he might struggle in a 4 way race.
Scott @ 2 — I think Ming was not a stalking horse but always intended that he should become leader. And look where it’s got them. Blairites who talk idly of a contest reinvigorating the party should look at the LibDems, as well as recalling past Labour leadership and deputy leadership contests.
Back to Labour — if there is to be a four-way race then four candidates will each have to find 44 MPs to sign their papers. Maybe Clarke will enter the race to flush out Miliband, and then withdraw so that Miliband can get 44 signatures, but it all seems a bit of a stretch.
O/T: WA Elections:
At last, a full opinion poll =>
http://www.itvregions.com/Wales/Programmes/WALES+DECIDES+2007.htm
Should keep Mark Senior happy - until he reads the LD figures..
No way, Clarke would never get on the ballot paper, he is a total joke.
He’ll get his 44. He’s well respected within the PLP, no chance of winning with that beard though.
Who’s going to want to be known as his campaign manager, though? A serious player would at least have announced (s)he had been asked to run by a stated number of MPs and/or Trades Union leaders.
The next time the MSM interview Brown they need to press him on whether or not he would prefer a contest.
Help - this web site is clever than I thought.
Have just penned a a long post - In brief, disappointed by Milibands refusal to stand and realising that this country needs a fresh “young man of the people” leader I have today had a damascene conversion and am applying to join the Conservative Party.
Anyway the filter didnt believe me and my post got lost. I think I described David Cameron as “thr*sting”" that may have done it
I’d think there’s more chance of seeing Blair at the Old Vic than Charles Clarke getting 44 nominations. Ever since he fell out of grace last year, he’s struck me as someone convinced he is right whether or not anyone agrees with him. Seeing the way he has failed to get any real liftoff to his anti-Brown campaign, that he is considering standing without any real supporters (except maybe Alan Milburn) doesn’t say much to me. Would he really encourage a great debate with Brown? Brown simply has to point out the respective ministerial records and ask the voters to make their choice.
And John L @ 4: I always think it’s the quality of the winning candidate that determines whether a party renews itself rather than the contest itself. However good the contest was, I can’t see the Tories radically changing the way they have had David Davis been elected, and the same contest could have produced a different sore of leader for the LDs last year. But you could talk about these ‘what ifs’ all day, and knowing this website, someone probably will
Interestingly Marina Hyde in Yesterdays Guardian seems to have inadvertenly combined both the Obsever and Sunday Times piece in one amusing article!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2047137,00.html
O/T. Crossword clue from last night.
Yellow bananas for fans (7)
Answer. Saffron.
For those who cant be bothered to read the link this is the first line;
“The end of the month holds a special dread these days, because if four weeks have elapsed, one knows with absolute certainty that it will only be minutes before Charles Clarke issues a denial of his total irrelevance”.
I think she’s hit the nail on the head!!
5. I’m sure Mr.Senior will tell us that any negative poll findings can immediately be dismissed and we should instead look at the Welsh Lib Dems’ fantastic record in local byelections…err…
Clarke to stand = April fool ?
12. Good clue. I always liked an old Guardian one “Dancers dress that is utterly utterly” 4 letters!
16. Roger. Tutu ?
More duplicity from Blair????
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/newscomment.html?in_article_id=445896&in_page_id=1787&in_a_source=
Meanwhile humiliation looms for Britain and the Labour government over the Iran hostages crisis. This ‘crisis’ could hardly have been better timed, electorally speaking. With the Iraq issue perhaps fading a little from the public mind, here is a striking reminder of how the UK has embarked on an aggressively interventionist foreign policy without either the military strength or the political will to properly carry it through.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=1EGYZFXCA04STQFIQMFCFF4AVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/04/01/wiran01.xml
Bloody Hell - Clarke is possibly the one figure that’d see me voting for Brown first!
But he’s got no bridges left to burn as far as GB is concerned, so what’s he got to lose? It’ll just raise his profile, and if he does well it might be the only way he can force himself into a Brown administration.
Max, if Sandi Thom has declared for SNP, Charlie Reid (from The Proclaimers fame) won’t vote for them anyway: he has switched to SSP. His twin will vote SNP again though
StJ. Yes of course!
If this isn’t an April fool and we are to take it seriously either Clarke wont get the 44 signitures or if he does then Miliband will surely be persuaded to carry the baton knowing that the party want a serious contest.
I have this depressing feeling that if Brown becomes leader he’s going to have his own assortment of oddballs like the one that used to oppose Major. But insted of being led by the seriously weird IDS and Thersa Gorman it will be led by the equally weird Charles Clark and Alan Milburn!
or: HIJKLMNO (5) from the guardians Araucaria (Cinephile in the FT)
21 - Andrea I loved the Sunday Mail’s description. I think they may be getting a little desperate.
“The defection to the SSP is a crushing blow for the Nats just a month before the Holyrood election on May 3.”
While on favourite crossword clues, how about:
E (14)
24. Max, the following line is worthy too: “It will stun supporters and spark a new debate about the SNP’s controversial funding from anti-gay campaigner and Stagecoach founder Brian Souter”
Mind you they headline it as a big “exclusive”…
Charles Clarke certainly has the look of a man about to launch a kamikaze mission: first the joint stunt with Milburn, now this. The key question is how Gordon would view such a bid.
As has been apparent over the last few years, a well run and contested leadership election can do a great deal for a party. But that requires a positive debate and candidates who can appeal to the public. The former is easier in opposition; the latter is not something that can readily be arranged - it’s either there or not.
It would do Gordon’s premiership some good for him to get it after a serious contest, but risking a serious contest would be very much against his political style if there’s a way of avoiding one - hence the Brownite ‘warnings’ to Miliband. Clarke might be a different matter though: to defeat a leftie like McDonnell is not really a serious mandate; to defeat a former Home Secretary - even a rather embittered one - would give him the ensured victory he wants against someone who has played near the highest level (even if he lost). He’s just about the ideal opponent for Brown and if GB’s any sense he’ll make it known that nominating Clarke won’t be seen as an offence.
The risk is that once the number of candidates grows, others might get sucked in as well. But providing the candidates are restricted to the 50-something pre-1997 era politicians, the young guns can bide their time.
Knowing when to run and when not to is one of the hardest calls in politics and requires luck as well as judgement. A generation of Democrats missed out when Clinton won in 1992 when they were all waiting for 1996 and Dan Quayle; Thatcher grabbed her chance when the grandees hesitated in 1975; Heseltine missed his by being forced to go earlier than 1992; Hague got the leadership before his time which proved an empty victory. Charles Clarke has never had ‘his time’, so that question doesn’t matter for him. For other younger men, they have to balance the chances of winning against the chances of being able to do something with that it. And on that basis, the conditions aren’t right for Miliband to stand, so I don’t think he will.
23,
Water (H to O; H2O)
How about “Gegs”, (9,4)
27. ‘candidates who can appeal to the public’
I think you have located the real snag there, David.
PS. Douglas Alexander is a very impressive politician. Surely a good bet for a future cabinet minister with either Gordon or Milly? A pity he isn’t in the Scottish parliament. He’s surely leadership material? Any Scottish voters got any thoughts?
A salutary piece in the US press about how Blair has emasculated the Royal Navy:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03282007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/hostage_sailors____britains_impotence_opedcolumnists_arthur_herman.htm?page=0
28. Scrambled eggs?
5,14 I read the posting 160 on March 30th from Mark Senior with much interest.
From his base on the English South Coast, Mark states “… I have not spoken to anyone in Wales recently …”
which gives us some insight in to the reliability of his many pronouncements on Wales.
30 - His sister sits in the Scottish parliament and is probably the more impressive of the two. She may well be the next leader of Scottish Labour if things go badly for Labour in May.
32, Ian - yup (it was on an episode of “Drop the Dead Donkey”, so it’s more or less the only crossword clue I know
)
30.”Douglas Alexander is a very impressive politician. Surely a good bet for a future cabinet minister with either Gordon or Milly”
He’s already in the Cabinet
“A pity he isn’t in the Scottish parliament. ”
His sister Wendy is there.
30. Well informed as ever.
31 Rik W. I only posted the story 3 days ago !!!!!!!!
Do wake up Rik or Admiral Penketh and I will have to take exemplary measures to you of rum, sodomy and the lash.
OT. I hope the fragrant Nuala is swooning over her cornflakes as the erudite Sir Malcie intones over the Beeb airwaves !!
I would rather respect this move by Charles Clarke - it may be that he really wants a debate that isn’t defined in the terms left, left and left again. They tried it with the website, which clearly won’t work - going for the leadership might kickstart such a debate though.
Thanks Max and Andrea (and Scallywag!). I should have checked!
Hmmm Rik W, (Sqn. Ldr. retd.)
So when John Nott published his defence review, which consigned the entire surface fleet to the junk yard, were you one of those Tories, (being a member of the RAF, always ready to dance on the Navy’s grave)who jumped in the air and shouted, ‘Yes’
5. So you claim you know them already………..
Scallywag and Andrea. Is ‘Minister for Europe’ in the Cabinet?
Malcie and Douglas Alexander both quite good this morning…or maybe it’s just that Andrew Marr is no Paxman.
Liking all the clues so far, mine was SENSELESSNESS by the way.
42 - coldstone - John Nott did no such thing. His review of the Navy would have left its strength 50% BIGGER than its current size!
And as it happened I was opposed to his proposed cuts then!
I am also not Sqn Ldr (Ret’d) thanks!
42 coldstone. How dare you sir !! At the time Rik was part of the SDP/Liberal Alliance with a Royal Navy defence policy as robust as quiche in a bain-marie !!
34 - Having said that I think there is a good chance that George Foulkes will be the next Labour leader in Scotland. Assuming he gets in that is.
44 - Roger, No. But, if you recall, the ludicrous Hoon thought he was being made Secretary of State for Europe in the (traditionally) botched reshuffle. Until Mrs. Beckett did an Iranian war dance…leaving poor Geoff as Minister of State but, to cover the humiliation, an entitlement to “attend” Cabinet.
His bitterness towards Blair has become increasingly apparent, and lo and behold he has volunteered his services to Gordon. Frankly, I can hardly blame him.
43. Not yet but I am working on it………
44. Roger, the minister for Europe is under Foreign Office, but he attends the Cabinet. I thought it was something just to keep Hoon happy though…
44. Up until the current incumbent: no, but I believe Geoff Hoon still attends (though I can’t find confirmation one way or the other). Douglas Alexander, on the other hand, has been Secretary of State for Transpost and Scotland for nearly a year now.
46
Sorry a case of mistaken identity!
Those cuts were only the first tranche, more would have followed.
Could you perhaps explain, (or can anyone) what was the thinking behind those cuts, perhaps they were justified, perhaps John Nott was right, would anyone be prepared to defend him.
50 Who is the pollster……
44. Roger stop making a fool of yourself.
54. NOP
34. I’ve long been gfar more impressed by Alexander than Miliband. The latter just comes across as a nerdish wonk on TV.
Well, as one of the people who might be asked to sign CC’s nomination papers I wouldn’t rule it out, but it’s complicated:
1. I think Gordon is both going to win and the best choice.
2. I like and respect Charles, and as Yokel points out this is widely shared in the PLP.
3. I don’t think he has any chance of winning, or that he would be a very popular choice with the electorate, partly because of the (IMO unfair) portrayal of his time at the Home Office.
4. I take him at face value: a serious politician who wants to debate policy and is not too bothered about his personal position (which at a less well-known level is how I like to think of myself). It misunderstands him to think he sees himself as a stalking horse for David Miliband or anyone else, or to think he expects to win.
5. A seriously-conducted contest would probably be good for the party. A messy election with several candidates and personal attacks would not.
So would I sign the paper? Maybe. Would it be a stop-Brown move? As far as I’m concerned, no. Would it be seen that way in the press? Probably, and that’s the difficulty.
53 coldstone. There were some in Conservative party at the time who thought Britains military power should be exercised mainly through the RAF and Army and effectively restrict the Royal Navy to a glorified coastal patrol force !!
John Nott was the exemplar of this policy and IMHO the most pitiable and awful minister in the Mrs T Cabinet .. as her vegetables went he was a portion of brussel sprouts ….. full of wind !!
I was getting my information from the Guardian Politics website where it says that Douglas A is Minister of State for Europe. Obviously more ill informed than me!!
Good Morning all , first opinion poll implies there will be more than one so they will give us more clues than the various parties’ spinnings . Will comment in due course but sadly ITV Wales not viewable down here .
58 - Definitely an April Fool surely? If this is taken seriously then surely Clarke will sail onto the ballot!
Senselessness.
58.”. A seriously-conducted contest would probably be good for the party. A messy election with several candidates and personal attacks would not”
uhm, that’s why Charles Clarke running can be “dangerous”. He can be quite OTT with some personal attacks or at least not nice words for others.
I see Blair Switch Market has not been rearranged to eliminate Q1 , anyone any ideas as to when they will do this and give us our profits ?
Geoff Hoon is Minister for Europe. Alexander is Sec of State for Scotland and Transport
60. Roger, he was promoted as Transport Secretary and Scotland Secretary in the post locals 2006 reshuffle
Good on you Mr Palmer. I agree with you and want a contest because it would bring out GB’s strong points which tend to get under-rated on this site. Remember..
1) Brown knows how to appeal both to the City and the Labour heartlands.
2) He is keeping lots of populist ideas up his sleeve for when he becomes PM.
3) How brilliant he is in election campaigns. How he will unite Labour - so can command a small majority if necessary.
4) He will not be blamed for Iraq and in spite of the knockers the economy is seen to have been sorted.
Labour will win again with Brown and Mr. Palmer will continue to serve Broxtowe.
59
Well I’m not going to defend Nott, but there was a rational reason.
DOAE, the Defence Operational Analysis Establishment, which analyses manuovers etc. had been concerned for some years over the problems that Frigates with their short fuel capacity had in attacking Nuclear Attack Submarines, they don’t run out of fuel. The Frigates answer was to use helicopters, the obvious riposte, if you need to resort to aircraft, why not just use aircraft. The Royal Air Force (as I pointed out always ready to dance on the Navy’s grave) gave assurances, that Nimrods operating from Kinloss and Ballykelly (NI) could cover the North Atlantic removing the need for surface ships. So there was hard thinking behind the cuts, and of course the Nimrods are much cheaper to buy and maintain than a frigate.
Coldstone You are being a little obtuse this morning. Options in Green papers are not always followed through in any administration. If you want daft suggestions by governments of any colour then they are rich material.
Its what is actually done that matters surely? And this government has promised much and delivered little.
Two aircraft carriers were promised. It now may be only one and even that has not started. Indeed the organisation to build the first one still doesn’t exists except in a press release. And in the meantime the existing mini-carriers are being sold off or are under what seems to be constant refit.
Not bad for a party which came to power saying, “That is why we have made it our guiding rule not to promise what we cannot deliver; and to deliver what we promise.”
Nick. The problem with a contest between Gordon and Clark is surely that to an outsider it doesn’t paint a very vibrant picture of the Labour Party. With Miliband it would be youth versus experience or with Mconnell-left versus right but with Clark its just heavy versus heavier……
64 Mark
It usually takes them a few days but if you send them an email they are likely to move a bit quicker.
67. Is this a different Professor than before?
68. Coldstone - is it fun debating with yourself like this?
Nick’s words about Clarke’s honourable intentions with no personal ambition are all very well, but he is on record as saying that Gordon Brown is not fit to be Prime Minister. So it’s hardly credible to suggest that he would be going into a contest with no intention of actually preventing Gordon from winning.
61 - This does suggest more than one poll - hopefully more informative than the two published so far…….
70 The problem, Roger, with a Milliband run is that it is likely to create long term problems, quite possibly a serious split. That wouldn’t happen with Clarke, however the Press might spin it.
LOL…some Italian news outlets have reported this piece as true….
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/arts/story/0,,2047566,00.html
59 Jack W - if you have a spare moment in planning the Jacobite Restoration I can recommend Iain Dales discussion on the Falklands with John Nott on 18 Doughty Street. He is reasonably honest on his mistakes and it’s a good insight into the times.
Interesting article Mike, but I don’t think there will be anything in it. Brown will make sure that there are not enough signatures. That said Brown’s methods are doing Labour no favours at all.
79.”Brown will make sure that there are not enough signatures.”
Brown isn’t certainly afraid of losing to Clarke, I suppose. The only “worry” in a Clarke bid would be if he spends the whole campaign doing stuff like the Evening Standard/Telegraph interview. The tories would be grateful if he provides more free quotes to use
More to the point is Margaret Beckett on a kamikaze mission????
There are many unanswered questions surrounding the capture of the fifteen British seaman/inspectors by the Iranians this week. Were they in Iraqi or Iranian waters? How can we be sure? Why did the British Foreign Office prohibit the frigate from going to the aid of the sailors when it could have? Why would Iran be so foolish as to hand the British and Americans an excuse to turn this provocation into an attack on Iran? Will it be enough to provoke war?
Rumour has it the USA airforce will go in hard next week-end,we will have to wait and see.
All are pertinent and interesting questions. Here is what we know so far. The dividing line is supposed to be down the middle of the channel, but that can be very difficult to discern visually with irregular shorelines. The British have provided GPS coordinates that show the site of the capture slightly inside Iraqi waters. But this position appears close enough to the center of the irregular channel that neither side could have known for sure if they were in violation or not, without individual GPS on each patrol boat. Even more strange, the crew of the Frigate has admitted they had contact with the British Foreign Office and were told specifically NOT TO INTERVENE. Did they want the provocation of hostages? If so, the British certainly won’t admit to it. They certainly could have blown the Iranian patrol boats out of the water, if they had wanted. This lends to the suspicion that the Brits were looking for a excuse to being victimized by Iran.
The ST article on the Brown’s pension raid has one element that I had missed. In the list of warning to Brown in the 1997 Treasury papers there is one very pertinent to the may locals. They say that Brown was warned that
“The local government pensions scheme, with 1.3m members, will require extra contributions. Result More than a quarter of council tax bills now go towards pension payments.”
82 - that’s absolute rubbish Witan. Just because the amount spent on Local Govt contributions is equivalent to a quarter of the Council tax charged does not mean that a quarter of Council tax is spent on it. If that was the case the lower tax councils would be spending ALL of their council tax on pensions and salaries!
Re Douglas Alexander - problem is that he is Scottish and only looks good in comparison to Milliband in that he can shave properly. He may also have Kelly-esque religious issues.
Why is pb.com taking tory pary advertising?
83 Alex Don’t flame me, I am only reporting what the ST says. Are you saying that the ST is wrong and that pension provision does not consume a quarter of the value of council tax collected?
85 - Coz the Conservative Party have money to spend?
Re 77, Andrea,
86 - yes.
85. Because it’s all an unfair anti-Labour stitch up of course, as you and your mates keep telling us.
85 For the money, perhaps?
I know you were only reporting what was written Witan, it wasn’t getting at you. But like i say you only have to think about it for a few moments to realise that it can’t be true.
92 alex i have thought about it. perhaps one of our local councillors can help us out.
One thought is that the ST is talking about the global annual collection of council tax across the whole country. And that 25% of the value of that collection equates to the cost of pension contributions annually to local authority staff.
Local authorities work on Council tax income and government grants, so their total income is greater than the council tax collected. So that might be one reason that the overall global value of the council tax collected is the equivalent of 25% the collection.
Secondly some councils have outsourced more than others and as a result have a lower direct payroll. So the pensions bill will be unequal between councils. So that will be another factor in the overall calculation.
26-What is controversial about Souter?
Dodgy services?
Dodgy finances?
Dodgy politics?
His attitude to “lifestyle choices” is uncontroversial for most people. Witness how many people signed up to Bishop Winning’s campaign FOR Section 28?
94. And the result of the Ayr byelection…
93 - that’s my point. The total pension contribution of councils may well be equivalent to 25% of the total council tax collected. But that is clearly not the same as saying that 25% of all council tax is spent on pension contributions. Rather what is true is that eg. for a council which gets 80% of its income from the Government and 20% from Council tax, that 5% of its total income is spent on Pension contributions. Which, for this fictional council, means that 1-2% of Council tax is spent on pensions.
I’m slightly confused by Nick Palmer’s comments at 58. On the one hand he tells us that he likes and respects Charles Clarke, and might sign up for his leadership bid. On the other hand he tells us that Brown is going to win anyway, and is actually the best choice.
This Charles Clarke chappie is, I believe, the same one that described Gordon Brown as “deluded”, “uncollegiate”, a “control freak”, and “absolutely stupid - stupid, stupid”.
So. Let’s go through this again. According to Nick Palmer, Labour MP for Broxtowe, Gordon Brown is inevitably going to win the Labour leadership, and is the best choice. However, Nick Palmer isn’t necessarily going to vote for the best choice candidate who is going to win anyway, he is going to vote for another man, who he likes and respects, a man who won’t win, a man who is on record as calling the next leader of the Labour party a “deluded stupid control freak”.
Glad we got that clear.
97 - lol. Same point i made, but far, far better expressed
Re 97, SeanT,Nick did not say that he would vote for Clarke, he said he may nominate him which is different.
Alex Ok, but then the ST statement is not untrue and, if undeniable, is dynamite on the local elections front, which is the point I was really trying to put across in the earlier post.
Benedict W How can you nominate someone in a contest as important as this that you are not prepared to vote for?
97. Nick P’s post makes a lot of sense to me and is not too dissimilar to what I wrote at [27]. Charles Clarke is an ideal opponent for Gordon Brown, providing that it doesn’t appear to become personal. That’s the main risk, and given how risk-averse Gordon is, it may still be too much for him to accept, but I can well understand people within Labour who want Brown as leader also wanting a contest - and Clarke would deliver that without really threatening Brown. Once defeated, he wouldn’t need to be in the cabinet unlike if someone like Miliband stood, which has got to be another plus from Brown’s point of view.
You need ‘astroturfing’ lessons from the Herbert family Witan!
99. I find it difficult to understand why you might nominate one man, when you believe another man is “going to win anyway and is the best choice”. Especially when the first man you nominate believes the other man is a “deluded stupid control freak”. Don’t you think Gordo might be a tad offended by your nominating someone who thinks he is a “deluded stupid control freak”?
I mean, I would. What’s Nick Palmer going to say when he bumps into Gordon in the tearoom? How would that conversation go? Something like this, perhaps? -
“Och, hello Nick.”
“Hi Gordon. Did I tell you I think you are the best choice and you are inevitably going to win?”
“Aye, Nick, you did, and that’s very nice of you.”
“However, I should tell you, I’m not going to nominate you.”
“No?”
“No. I’m going to nominate this other guy I really like and respect, who thinks you are a deluded stupid control freak.”
61. You got Sky you can watch it.
75. Beeb Radio doing a piece on Polish migrants in Wales next week. Raises a serious point, there are thousands of people now who weren’t there in 2003 and what’s more they can vote. If they do to any degree most speculation is it is the Conservatives who will be chief beneficiaries.
100 - The Sunday Times statement IS untrue, they say that 25% of Council tax bills are spent on Pensions, when the true figure is somewhere between 1 and 5%. They did not say “the equivalent of 25% of council tax is spent on Pensions”.
That local authority pensions bills have gone up overall (per worker who is a member of the scheme) is undeniable (it’s doubled) and to that extent you can apply blame to Gordon Brown as much or as little as you choose (and in proportion to the extent that you blame him for all pensions).
But the Tories would be stupid to repeat misleading claims about council tax, especially when they are running so many councils that pay the staff (the easiest way to cut current pensions contributions is, of course, to cut staff - although that is clearly not a good way to maintain the viability of the pensions schemes in the long term).
David H. It wouldn’t be easy to have a civilized debate with someone with so much history. Surely as Andrea and others have said said he’ll just face endless questions about whether if he lost he would be happy for the Labour Party to be led by a control freak etc. Not good for the party methinks!
105 - Polish immigrants can vote in Welsh Assembly Elections? So elections are not fought under General Election rules?
105
105 Will be at work anyway
108. No. Local, regionals they can vote.
Herbert Proper Junior. “Rumour has it the USA airforce will go in hard next week-end,we will have to wait and see”
Did Condi give you this tip, Herb?
.
For Clarke to emerge from a bid without total humiliation, I reckon he has to get at least 35-40% of the votes cast.
This is probably acheivable if McDonnell doesn’t get on the ballot - which I think he will.
If McDonnell stands, 20% of the vote is his minimum. That leaves Chharlie boy needing 35-40% on top of McDonnell’s score - which means reducing Brown to 40-45%. Which might appear pretty unlikely. Many McDonnell supporters probably wouldn’t bother voting either way if it’s just Brown vs Clarke, which will make Clarke’s vote look better percentage wise.
So expect some pressure from Clarke supporters to try and stop the McDonnell nominators… especially any who might be ready to nominate him ‘just to ensure there’s a contest’…
The ultimate humiliation will be when McDonnell beats Clarke
And then beats Brown too
105. IIRC, the only constituency where there are sufficient numbers to make a difference, is Wrexham, where they are being closely chased by Forward Wales (John Marek). But the general feeling is that they are (a) unaware of the Welsh election, (b) indifferent to the Welsh election, (c) could vote for anyone.
107. That’s always a possibility, though as Sean points out (as to be fair, did Nick in his first post), it would be an equal problem for people nominating Clarke. That’s why people who’ve been so openly backing Brown will have difficulty nominating Clarke - but there should be enough others to get the 44 necessary.
Dealing with his comments from last year is something Clarke would have to do early on - “I am interested in an election of ideas, not of personalities” or something similar. He must know that personal attacks do neither him nor his party any favours. That said, he must have known that last year as well, but perhaps he thought someone else might get the leadership then, so justified it that way in his own mind. If Clarke refuses to rise to the bait, the media will get bored of asking him as they got bored of asking Cameron questions about cannabis.
Andrea at 77. I’m working on the writers name which must be an anagram or similar. ‘Pahli Tarikh’
99 Congrats on your storming return to Iain Dale’s linking sites list, having dropped out the previous month see you are back in at number 4.
112 - Every day is April Fool’s day in the Herbert household…..
Clarke is the perfect candidate for Brown to try and feign a show of interest in a contest, someone who he could beat, someone who people know and someone with (unfairly or not) a tarnished reputation. It would be a contest but a mere shadow of one.
Miliband, as I’ve said before, is too intelligent to lead a party who haven’t yet reached the bottom. He’ll bide his time.
re 85. Jonathan: we are taking advertising for the same reason that the rest of the media takes political advertising - the money. It costs quite a lot to keep the site going and I am very happy to take political advertising from all the mainstream political parties.
Every single day 30-40k words are written on here and loaded and downloaded thousands of times by users and I would guess that our bandwidth costs are higher than any other political site.
112 yes it was Condi, she has become one of the vocies in his head.
120 He’s in good company. Didn’t God tell GWB to invade Iraq? Or was it Gord?
Alex Would people on the doorstep, having just had their inflation busting council tax bill, be receptitive to an argument that the ST did not bother to as ‘equivalent to’ in their claim and they should have done?
I think not.
114. The Radio said 2,000+ in Llabelli alone. If you go to any restaurant in wales these days you have a very good chanc e of finding Polish employees. I think you underestimate their numbers. In a low turnout election anything could make a difference. The Poles home political culture is shall we say Conservative with a rather large C. If they chose to vote I suspect the Conservatives would benefit disproportionately.
116. Hah - April kit
122 -
1) I do not think parties should campaign on the basis of grossly misleading statements and inaccuracies. It always seems to comes back to harm them in the future. And arguing that the increasing cost of local government pensions has caused council tax to double falls into the category of grossly misleading to me.
2) It would be extremely risky for the Conservatives to focus a local campaign around “local taxes are higher than they should be”, when they are in control of so many of those councils (except in the context of saying that they will keep council taxes lower than their opponents)
3) To run a campaign on such a basis would make them extremely unpopular among their senior staff. And of course, don’t forget that most councillors are in the LGPS as well! Arguments of this nature will always harm the LGPS far more than it will harm the Chancellor.
Benedict 99. I’ve now added you site to our links bar
121 - “Bush attacks Iran over captives ” on BBC website - apparently a verbal reprimand rather than an invasion, but aren’t BBC headline writers crap!
125 (con) - Witan i should add that the Sunday Times (possibly the Sunday Telegraph?) have made these claims before. They did a big article on in about a year ago. And a leading pension fund company that appeared in the article had to make A LOT of grovelling apologies afterwards.
Mike - very charitable!! How many times did he ask you
102 - Surely Clarke is praying for the type of tete a tete we saw with the Conservative party leadership race? That would give Clarke THE opportunity to trap Brown on national television on issues such as pensions and “the betrayal of the common man” line. Clarkes only hope is to insist within the media that “it is only right that we have a full a frank debate in front of the nation”. Gordo can’t really argue against this as the Tories did it whilst in opposition, if the dour one is seen to refuse to take part in a “full and frank” debate then it could polically neuter him even if he does win - Is this what Clarke actually wants? Get Brown out of the way quicker and get the Millipede in there to challenge D.C. at the following general election.
PS - Apologies for the awful spelling, severe Gin and Stout hangover.
Re 101, Witan, I suggest you direct that question elsewhere, like for example at Nick Palmer.
re 129. I’m hoping that this will cut down his self-promotion…but I doubt it. There’s another Lembit Opik in the making there.
Re 104,SeanT,
but direct those questions to Nick Palmer!
Charles Clarke may be respected in the PLP, but ordinary members in the constituency parties don’t have time for him at all. He’s held responsible for last May’s council election defeats. He hung on, when he should have resigned (and retained some dignity), forcing Blair to sack him after the story had run two weeks.
He then toured the studios attacking Blair just before the May elections, just to keep the story in the news. Then just before Blaenau Gwent by-election, up he pops in the studios again, attacking John Reid for the changes he made in the home office, so that all the news before the election was about rehashing the Home Office problems. Then he attacks Brown in September, once it was clear that Brown would be standing for leader.
I don’t know if the timing was deliberate or if he just didn’t think because he was caught up in his own psychodrama. But if you are an ordinary member who has spent loads of your free time burning shoe leather delivering leaflets and the like, this kind of self-indulgence from former cabinet members makes you want to cry. And if you are some councillor who’s worked hard all year only to find your efforts cancelled out by someone’s tantrum…
I think ordinary members would welcome Clarke standing as it gives a chance to show him what they think and humiliate him in a public vote. It would serve him right he got less votes than McDonnell.
Witan, I think my post was perfectly clear. Helping to decide whether there should be a contest is one thing. Deciding who to vote for is another. McDonnell is getting signatures from people who wouldn’t dream of voting for him, for exactly the same reason.
But, as andrea says, it needs to be a positive contest that doesn’t give the Tories any gifts, and I’d need to be persuaded that that was likely.
As usual, can’t be bothered to reply to seanT. His obscene joke about the possible fste of the hostages on last night’s thread reinforces my opinion of his general level of contributions here.
Beards like that should be illegal.
21 - Andrea having been to the Newsagents the story about Charlie Reid is (unbelievably) the lead story in the Sunday Mail. The headline ‘SNP no more’ is splashed all over the front page. They must be getting a bit nervous about the SNP.
123. 2,000 extra Conservative votes in Llanelli wont make any difference in that seat…….Interestingly, Plaid have been sending out Polish leaflets in Llanelli.
In fact I have seen quite a few new Poles scattered around the Valleys, and I suspect that they tend to live in the less prosperous parts. The few Labour-Conservative battlegrounds in Wales tend to be realtively wealthy, and less likely to include too may additional Poles.
re 117,Ted, many thanks, a day after I dropped out I knew I was going to be back in with a vengeance thanks to the cash for peerages story! I posted on that thread to say so
re 125, Alex “2) It would be extremely risky for the Conservatives to focus a local campaign around “local taxes are higher than they should be”, when they are in control of so many of those councils (except in the context of saying that they will keep council taxes lower than their opponents)”
We may control many councils but we do not control which services we have to provide nor do we have any control over our grant settlement which has decreased in real terms since 1997.
Snowflake - 135 I’ve now put a link up to your site on the revised links bar. I had to balance Benedict!
Re 126,Mike, Many thanks, I’ll let you off that royalty fee for rabid self promotion
BTW, is there a book on political betting you could recommend and if so where can it be purchased?
Re 129, Icarus as I recall it was Pete the punter making most of the requests.
Re 133, Mike,rumours that I have been with a cheeky girl are just that, rumours. I would be grateful if you did not spread these lies!
What would the Tories do with council tax? They won’t scrap it. They won’t reform it. Is linking local taxation to (often hypothetical) property values in 1991 such a great idea?
I do understand that the Tories support the concept of council tax, however. It is after all their invention.
144 That’s right, Icky. As Benny’s Agent, I get a small commission. It’s not much, but the way my dog’s running, I need all I can get.
142. Mike, many thanks.
58/104 NickP Sean
Surely the obvious solution would be for Brown to explicitly encourage people to nominate an alternative such as Clarke. Suppose Brown himself asked his treasury team (Timms Primarolo, Balls and their PPSs as a group to sign Clarke’s nomination papers and then put out a letter that they had his full support as he thought a contest would be beneficial. Would be hard to spin as an “Stop Brown” thing then and would arguably make Brown seem magnanimous and not risk averse or afraid of a contest.
Re 149, Paul M., That would indeed be the magnanimous thing to do, but Brown won’t do it!
Benedict @ 145: She must have been impressed by the size of your blog!
Very surprised by some of the pro-CC comments here this morning, he is someone I have little time for over his record in Government and the way he has conducted himself over the past 12 months - although given Labour’s batch of bitter ex-Home Secretaries, thankfully he has kept his trousers on as far as we know.
And I am not alone in confusion over Nick’s suggestion that he would consider nominating Clarke while supporting Brown - either an April Fool or a moment of bravado surely?
Perhaps CC (like Peter Hain) is one of those people who come across far better in person than in the media.
Re 151, tpfkar, :lol:What this one:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
152 - Benedict - all this shameless self promotion at every opportunity regarding your blog is becoming too much. Have you considered a career in politics?
:
I think that Nick’s comments are fair enough. He’s clearly recognised the dangers, for his party, in not holding a contest.
“Any contest at all” will surely play better in the media than “no contest at all” will.
“Brown against no other candidates” would just look very, very silly indeed against the backdrop the genuine, parallel, contest for the deputy leadership. The media will, given the chance, ruthlessly contrast the dynamics of the two events - I don’t imagine that many Labour MPs fancy facing weeks of that.
****************************************************************
****************************************************************
Scottish Labour/LD defeat Alert!Scottish Labour/LD defeat Alert!
Looks like the SNP are going to wipe the floor with Labour.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/scotland/6514575.stm
Scottish Labour/LD defeat Alert!Scottish Labour/LD defeat Alert!
****************************************************************
****************************************************************
136. Oh dear Nick, I always know I’ve got to you, when you make some pompous remark to the effect “I’m not going to reply to SeanT” and then you go on to explain precisely why you’re not going to reply to me in some detail, usually with some insulting little barb thrown in, because you feel all hurt and angry but don’t want to admit it. As here.
Your petticoats are showing, dearie. I’ll post this on the other thread, too, so you can learn from your elementary debating mistakes.
156. Right on, pathetic excuse of an MP. He moans about bullying then freezes people out, which is bullying in it’s self.
He knows he cannot win the argument and so due to his “status” he thinks he can deploy, abusive and one sided statements.
He prints nothing more than propaganda to indoctrinate the gullible to his cause. Such a shame a man of ability such as NP being consigned to the back benchers whilst less talented people are on the front bench. A man with a PHD consigned to writing drivel for Labour supporters who support anything the Labour party tell them.
No wonder the Labour party seeks to limit civil liberties, eradicate individualism and curtail economic choice. After leading a bunch of sheep for a hundred years they now want to make us all follow the heard…………………Baarrrrrrrrrr Nick Palmer!
157 - Looks like the Tarquin’s back again. Who’ll lay me odds that it’s the extended Herbert family? The style’s the same and so’s the spelling.
Come on, out with it. Are you such a complete coward? Have you got no balls at all? Are you really so pathetic that you need to hide behind a new name?
Another excellent article by Matthew d’Ancona in the Sunday Telegraph. The fear and fury of the Brown camp to any suggestion of a serious challenge speaks volumes for their edgy state as the moment of truth arrives. That in turn is exactly the wrong way for the Chancellor to present himself to the public. Does GB really believe that Beckett’s idiotic intervention did him any good? Doesn’t he understand that it suggested a growing fear of what a real challenge might achieve? If he had any sense he would portray himself as eager to take on allcomers. Instead he seeks pathetically to avoid one at all costs. Penndu/Andrea Where’s that bloody Welsh poll? I’ve looked up the link but I’m too stupid to find it!
158 Yes he is a complete coward suffering from multiple schizophrenia .
159 I don’t think the poll will be released until the program is broadcast - next Thursday !!!! so it may not have even been conducted .