Party Hierarchy: Take a lesson from Sir Alex Ferguson

Those at the top of our party should take sound advice from Sir Alex about what they do and how it affects ordinary members.

I think it was Sir Alex Ferguson (a major party supporter) who upbraided some of his spoilt, famous players with a reality check which went something like this: remember that ordinary working class fans have to save up months of their hard-earned low wages just to come and see you rich youngsters play football; and what you do on the pitch each week affects them in their ordinary lives; in particular, remember that when they go into work on Monday morning they have to face their workmates who may insult them and rib them and mock them on the basis of how you perform individually and as a team; a bad losing performance from you affects how the fan's life is on Monday morning and sometimes for the rest of the week: it matters.

Isn't is the same in our party? Are you, as an ordinary Labour party member, sick and tired of having to defend the increasingly indefensible as you go to work or meet with members of your extended family or go to the gym, or whatever? Because I am.

We do it out of genuine loyalty or party discipline (er..perhaps) or because we feel stupid and hypocritical for being a member if we don't.  

And I think the hierachy of our party simply has no idea about this.

As a former councillor, with even more strength I am publicly identified with the party I have been a member of for 20 years. When things are going out of control nationally (as they seem to be doing non-stop) it is a ritual daily humiliation for us, isn't it? Walking down the street, in the local shops, at family gatherings, it impacts on the ordinary everyday level.

Don't we find that nasty bloke at work who we never liked because he's a fascist making a bee-line for us the morning after the latest blunder ready to pounce in the car park with the barbed one-liner (in his case a 20-liner, he's so thick)?

Don't we find we have even to endure the ironic, side-swipe comments from our close friends? It's a bit like having, to coin a phrase, scars on our backs?

Now I'm not saying that politics isn't a rough, tough old game and we do have to take some of it on the chin, but it's simply getting worse by the day. Obviously, depending on our points of view, the Iraq legacy has been the most serious and grave. Most people made their mind up on that one long ago, though.

But the insistent daily grind of apparent incompetence and hypocrisy and plain ignorant behaviour at the top of our party is what we have to endure with varying degrees of stoicism over the last 2 months in particular; and it hurts.

What I can't stand is that we are often prevailed upon by party hacks and the Stephen Byers-types to back our leaders and talk up the party and point out the good stuff, rather than, frankly, to join in with our mates and enemies and give the party leaders a good metaphorical kicking.

I am sick and tired as an ordinary member having to suffer the daily slings and arrows of outrageous behaviour from on high and being told to suffer it some more.

The ever-ongoing Prescott nonsense, the whole home office fiasco, the Ruth Kelly hypocrisy, the Loans scandal (by which I mean the fact that we definitely took them and hid them; not, I hasten to add, the cash-for-loans enquiry - which is a whole other ball game) have been for me the most recent nadirs in what I have to put up with in my real everyday life.

Last year one of the nadirs was the Trust Schools nonsense: our party and our MPs voted overwhelming against it in parliament. Still it becomes law and I have to defend it as one of Tony's pet projects. As a teacher, of course, this is one of the occasions when I simply have failed to defend it on a Monday morning - why should I, when most of our party's MPs didn't? I am here to support the Labour Party's projects, not Tony's supported by Cameron.

The only thing I've been able to push with pride recently has been the  8 extra days holiday for those who don't get bank holidays off.

I am afraid, though, that the Cash for honours/ obstruction of justice Police Enquiry drip, drip, drip actually has done the most damage and causes the most damage to me personally.

In the workplace I am personally tainted by it: instead of pride in the party I love, I feel real shame. I feel my character is judged badly by others for guilt by association with that lot at the top.

Whether or not any charges come out of this, enough facts have come out of this to make it extremely bad news. Over-closeness to unprincipled business leaders and their tainted money has tainted our party and every member in it.

The conclusion is stark, though: every day that Tony Blair continues in office is making the experiences I have outlined above worse. Because no-one sees him as the person to be able to change things. The paralysing status quo is extremely damaging.

There are those who suggest that we 'owe it' to Tony to let him stay on til a time of his choosing and let him do 10 years. This is nonsense. Tony is where he is because of ordinary hard-working members and voters. He holds a position of privilege and it is not a right. He owes us.

It is similarly insulting to those of us left in the party actually campaigning in local government/assembly elections to suggest that he should wait til after them, so Gordon doesn't get a good kicking to start off. I don't hold a candle for either camp, but I'd far rather go into the elections with Gordon, and the result of that would be more Labour members elected than under Tony. That's the bottom line.

Of course I do not expect things to go well in May, but why should Tony being there make it better? We should not be structuring our party's campaigning over how easy or not things will be in May for either Tony or Gordon.

The party members have suffered enough and need a fresh start. They need to have things happen in the Labour Party now, to make them feel good about the party again. Because at the moment I cannot point to anyone I actually know in the party who feels proud of it at the moment.

Those at the top should listen to Fergie: what you do affects us in a very real way, every day.  


Display: Sort:

Re: Party Hierarchy (#1)

I have to disagree with you there.

The Labour government have got more important things to concentrate on than worrying about whether they should do things that might lead to Labour Party members getting a gentle ribbing on a Monday morning.

Anyone who thinks like that needs to grow a thicker skin.

Re: Party Hierarchy (#3)

I think you're missing my point and that is probably my fault for being a bit too unclear and verbose (I felt I needed to get it off my chest!).

I did say that I accepted that politics is a rough, tough old game, (I've had 20-odd years of it, in elected office and out!)and you obviously have thicker skin than me.

It's the fact that it is no longer in the zone of gentle ribbing that's my point. It is dangerous, too, that we let it run off our backs, because it is a sign of a much deeper malaise out there.

If committed members now find it difficult, even impossible, actually to defend (and I've spent most of the last 10 years valiantly doing so)the actions of our party leaders, their decisions and choices, then we are in real lasting trouble.

How does one effectively defend the secret loans issue beyond batting it away and saying the rest are as bad? Is that it?

My problem is that we did promise to be whiter than white/purer than pure. Do we say, er...sorry about that, that was too high a standard. We'll just promise to be as not quite as bad as the others?

Trust is the issue - let's face it: we've lost it. In the short term, certainly, and if we don't act quickly to try to stem this, it will be our Black Wednesday moment. That means we have to throw out the baby (Tony) with the bathwater.

Re: Party Hierarchy (#8)

Im not sure whether your talking about defending the party to others and defending your membership of 'such a party' to others.

And Im not sure you are either.

Re: Party Hierarchy (#9)

I'm Labour through and through (new, real and old; social democrat, leftie, Blairite, Brownite, Hainite, TBennite, HBennite - I am all of these things) and have done strirling work to defend both my membership of and the actions and policies of my party.

I'm sorry if people are missing my obviously badly-made main point here.

The party heirarchy are not seeing things often enough from the point of view of ordinary members. We are the party's eyes and ears. We are its everyday, on-the-street mouthpiece, too, and we are trying our best. The actions of those at the top must pass a member test. Would the ordinary party member be at least able to defend my actions honestly whether they agreed with it or not? Because that's what they will have to do. I simply don't think (clearly it's a personal judgement) it enters the picture at all. I'm saying it should.

I do my best and, with the odd exception (notably Trust schools, as I said), I support and defend my party and the Labour government it has brought into power.

But, to be frank, there should be more recognition by the top of the party that it is extremely hard to do this at the moment - it's not necessarily anything to do with actual policies, real politics, it's more often procedure and behaviour.

Loyalty is crucial, as is discipline - but it has to go both ways.

Re: Party Hierarchy: (#2)

I think it's grossly unfair to compare Alex Ferguson with the Labour party's situation. Great msn though Fergie is, football should not be taken as seriously as politics.

There is no national embarrassment with the Labour party and I'm very proud of the good work that the government does. Members who do feel embarrassed should perhaps question their own values before questioning the governments.

Re: Party Hierarchy: (#4)

You may be right and I am over-reacting. I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

I obviously  think your judgment of the 'National Mood' inside or outside the party is wrong.

Not quite sure what you mean by that last comment, comrade? Power, Wealth and Opportunity in the hands of the many, not the few - that's one of my Labour Party values.

Please explain.

Re: Party Hierarchy: (#5)

Well I'm firmly New Labour and of course I believe in social democracy but I am adamantly against any attempts to drag the party back to 'old Labour' days.

Re: Party Hierarchy: (#6)

Right, is that all you meant by members who feel embarrassed (e.g. me) should question our own values? I was a bit taken aback by that in such a comradely site as this.

Did you mean simply that we should work out whether we are actually new Labour, or 'old' Labour (or Gordon's 'real' Labour, perhaps)? I was a bit confused there.

As it happens, I've been at the forefront of New Labour right from the beginning: that's why I believe in the continual regeneration of the party. Something we need now more than ever.

Re: Party Hierarchy: (#7)

I wasn't necessarily suggesting you by my comments.

I think we should always remain New Labour, but we should renew policies and make new, bold policies within the New Labour philosophy.

Of course continual regeneration of the party is very important.