DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn!

doctordunc Sat May 19, 2007 at 12:58:41 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

In the immediate aftermath of this week's events I said I'd be spoiling the ballot for the Deputy contest.  But I've changed my mind.



I still think that this is a largely irrelevant contest (all the candidates will probably be in Brown's cabinet, any one of them could end up being Deputy Prime Minsiter or Party Chair: we're basically voting for one person to have a bit of job security...)

My earlier inclination had been to vote for Benn.  I briefly flirted with Cruddas.  I had considered spoiling the ballot as a political comment on the leadership 'election'.  But I didn't want to encourage others to do the same, and as a solitary action it would be pretty futile.

So - I'm going to follow Tony, Dennis Skinner and Jeremy Corbyn and back Hilary Benn.  He may be a Benn, not a Bennite, but I'm sure he won't turn his nose up at a few Bennite supporters.

Good luck, Hilary!



tags: , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! | 87 comments (87 topical)

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#1)

by jonesythered on Sat May 19, 2007 at 01:09:14 PM GMT

Admittedly Benn has never called for reducing the union share of the vote at party Conference - that's got to be a plus


Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#2)

by grimupnorth on Sat May 19, 2007 at 01:21:50 PM GMT

Duncan has set up a group on Facebook called Bennites for Benn.Let's all join, vote for Hilary in the DL contest and see off the ersatz leftie Cruddas.


Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#74)

by Ian G on Mon May 21, 2007 at 10:03:34 AM GMT

Why have a someone who shares some of your politics when you can have a hardcore Blairite, eh?

I didn't see Hilary trooping through the lobbies to vote against trident. What about protecting agency workers? Cruddas was there, where was Benn? Which one voted against top up fees? What about Iraq? at least Cruddas admitted he made a mistake, Benn is unrepentant.

If we base our voting decisions on spite rather than logic, we're all done for.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#75)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 10:09:12 AM GMT

A lot depends on what you see the role of deputy leader being and how you believe people will act once in place.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#77)

by Ian G on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:41:41 AM GMT

Well, Brown has apparently said that he wants the deputy leader to focus on rebuilding the party and connecting the party with the government, which I agree with.

That's exactly what Jon has been campaigning for. I've got nothing against Hilary Benn personally, but I find it difficult to imagine him reviving the grass roots. He'd be much better employed in a senior ministerial post.

I do trust that Jon will advocate the sort of policies which he has been running on at the cabinet table. I'm sure he will do his best to push social housing, workplace rights and social cohesion up the political agenda. How much influence he'll have remains to be seen.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#80)

by jonesythered on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:04:05 PM GMT

Ian, Once again, I think that this entirely misses the point. The deputy leader post is a non-job with no policy-making powers. Although Cruddas has a few political differences from the others, they're irrelevant - because there's nothing that he can do about them. All policies will flow from Brown - and, as we know, there's been no opportunity to debate policies with him because MPs such as Cruddas denied us the opportunity to have a contest. Even if Cruddas argues for these policies privately (far from our gaze - how will we even know he's doing it?), they will be ignored. Do you honestly think Brown will ever even consider introducing a Trade Union Freedom Bill or reversing trust schools no matter how much Cruddas argues with him privately behind closed doors? The problem you have is that because the political differences between the various candidates are relatively small - and because this is over a non-job - party members and trade unionists will treat this as a personality contest. In that case, Benn will emerge triumphant. See this revealing article by Polly Toynbee entitled 'All in Agreement': http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/polly_toynbee/2007/05/all_in_agreement.html


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#81)

by jonesythered on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:04:56 PM GMT

"Well, Brown has apparently said that he wants the deputy leader to focus on rebuilding the party and connecting the party with the government, which I agree with. That's exactly what Jon has been campaigning for." In that case Jon has lost his trump card - because whoever wins, this will be the role of the deputy leader anyway!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#3)

by Lorin on Sat May 19, 2007 at 03:14:29 PM GMT

All lefties, vote for Benn. Not Cruddas


Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#4)

by krindlekrax on Sat May 19, 2007 at 03:41:56 PM GMT

This really is a fuzzy line of logic: vote for Hilary Benn because he is a Benn. The reason a few of the hard left of the Labour Party have backed Benn is out of spite, because Jon Cruddas did not vote for McDonnell - the very man who screwed over some of the most decent and honest Labour MPs, and destroyed the possibiity of a proper challenge from the left of the party more than a year ago. Of course, neither did Hilary Benn but at least he shares his father's genes, eh? Your argument shows personal bitterness superceding ideas, optimism and policy. That is pathetic.


Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#13)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:54:24 PM GMT

I didn't start this thread to slag off Jon Cruddas or anyone else (if other people want to, feel free). I would have thought most people would think it a positive thing that I've gone from planning on spoiling my ballot paper to voting for one of the candidates. Of course Hilary's policy position is a million miles from mine: that's the case with all the candidates. I do, however, think he's probably the best disposed towards viewing the party as a broad church. I may be wrong, but that's how I see it. But as you've pressed me on the Cruddas point: yes, I probably would have registered my vote for Cruddas if he had refrained from nominating Brown. I think he's said some good things aobut social housing and done some good work fighting the BNP. I think Peter Hain's done a good job in Northern Ireland; there are things I like about several of the candidates. But Benn didn't frame his entire campaign around the idea of democratisation, only to then make a mockery of the entire thing. If Cruddas had backed Brown once it was all up for McDonnell that might have been strategically wise (if a little dishonest) but nominating Brown when he did was strategically idiotic. Brown was hardly in dire need of that 305th nomination (or whatever it was). I understand your position, Otley, but I really don't think I'm cutting off my nose to spite my face (spoiling my ballot might have been that, when my complaint is that I've been disenfranchised). I just honestly don't think this deputy election is a left/right one. If it is (for some of you) I don't know which is the left candidate (unless simply not being in the cabinet automatically makes you more left?) So other things will influence some voters. A present for Tony? Yeah, why not?


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#78)

by Ian G on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:54:12 AM GMT

It certainly was all up for McDonnell before Cruddas nominated Brown. There was never any chance that Jon could have forced a contest. I do get really annoyed by this inference that people who don't support John McDonnell can't be in favour of party democracy. Would McDonnell have nominated Alan Milburn just to get a contest?


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#25)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:25:06 PM GMT

On the other point you made, about 'a proper challenge from the left of the party' - the only possible left candidates back last spring were John McDonnell or Alan Simpson. Alan Simpson had already ruled himself out. John was a fantastic candidate and he involved huge numbers of people in his decision (such as the LRC conference attended by hundreds of Labour members and trade unionists). The idea that it was a unilateral declaration may be popular in some quarters, but being popular doesn't make it true. He then went on to secure very enthusiastic grassroots support all around the country. So please refrain from the badmouthing of a campaign you don't seem to have understood.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#37)

by jkitleft on Sat May 19, 2007 at 08:37:54 PM GMT

couldn't Lynne Jones have done well? She was the contender for a while.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#40)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 09:54:27 PM GMT

I'm sure Lynne Jones would have done a lot better since 1) She is softer left and 2) She is a woman. What might have been..........


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#41)

by jonesythered on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:16:29 PM GMT

I have the greatest respect for Lynne Jones, but a) she has no base within the unions or party; and b) above all, she is a maverick. As for being "softer left" - well, her voting record is comparable to that of John McDonnell (I think she's 3rd or 4th most rebellious MP in Parliament). The reason John was the best candidate is because of his base within the unions and party and his history of engaging with activists and building grassroots support. He is also the most articulate and consistent socialist within Parliament who puts forward radical policies in a moderate, intelligent fashion - and avoids coming across as a demagogue. What I find amusing about these sorts of conversations - where those on the right of the party offer comradely (!) advice about which MP would have been the best left candidate - is that it completely misses the point. Whoever stands from the left will face an instant barrage of abuse and vitriol. If Lynne Jones had stood, she would have just as much venom by the right of the party. The reason those on the right don't like John McDonnell is because he represents politics they object to. That's really all there is to it. Take Tony Benn. Loved by all now he's no longer a threat. In the early 80s he was the "most dangerous man in Britain." The day John starts being universally liked is the day he stops being regarded as any sort of threat. Therefore, in a sense, I welcome the continued abuse and vitriol thrown in his direction.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#42)

by Mikael on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:20:05 PM GMT

"2) She is a woman..."???

What does that have to do with anything??? I like Lynne Jones, she's a fine representative of the Labour Left, but come on... I mean, Thatcher was awoman too, wasn't she!!!????!!!!

Not very sensible...


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#43)

by HenryG on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:29:54 PM GMT

I think the only Campaign Grouper with broader appeal to thrive in these circumstances is Ken Livingstone. And he isn't in Parliament.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#44)

by jonesythered on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:37:29 PM GMT

That's funny, Henry, because when Ken Livingstone stood for Mayor he was bombarded with some of the worst abuse and vitriol from all directions imaginable. When he stood for leader in 1992, he got 13 nominations. Let's keep away from revisionist history, shall we?


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#48)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 01:45:15 AM GMT

Ken twice failed to get nominations to launch leadership bids too.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#52)

by grimupnorth on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:02:06 AM GMT

Ken didn't get the nominations in 1994.And look how they tried to stitch him up over the Mayor issue. Basically, if you're on the left,you are going to get trashed by the right of the Party.Which is why we need more MPs - FAST


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#57)

by krindlekrax on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:12:53 AM GMT

And, of course, it should be noted that Ken is backing Jon Cruddas for the deputy leadershp.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#45)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:40:30 PM GMT

heyhey it was sensible, as I think there would have been more sympathy in the party for a sister trying for the leadership. I don't want to do a Hilary Benn and get in trouble for stereotyping women, I just think her womanhood could have been played to her advantage.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#46)

by jonesythered on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:53:12 PM GMT

Unbelievable


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#47)

by Mikael on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:54:06 PM GMT

Ridiculous... Beckett didn't win, or did she??? In the last analysis she was a woman too.

Not sensible at all, honestly... for being a "Sensible Comrade", you're not coming off as particularly convincing!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#51)

by Sensible Comrade on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:53:32 AM GMT

Obviously she didn't win, but at least she got nominated!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#56)

by jonesythered on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:10:21 AM GMT

You don't think that had anything to do with the fact she was already acting leader of the party and had been in the Shadow Cabinet for years rather than that she happened to be a woman? No? Just a thought


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#58)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:18:53 AM GMT

Please calm down everybody. Yes - Lynn could have made a good candidate; I don't think there's any logic for suggesting she'd have made as good a candidate as John, but everyone's entitled to their view. John McDonnell himself said he thought Lynn could have made a good candidate in a Q&A thing in one of the papers the other week.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#53)

by grimupnorth on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:02:42 AM GMT

What, she could have worn pretty frocks and so on ........


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#5)

by chickenlittle on Sat May 19, 2007 at 03:58:13 PM GMT

Voting for someone because of who his daddy is? Exactly the sort of rubbish Labour and the left are supposed to be against, no?


Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#14)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:56:16 PM GMT

I never said that was the reason. But the Deputy Leader is not a role of particular interest. Voting to cheer up Tony is as good a motive as any other!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#26)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:30:21 PM GMT

Tony Benn or Tony Blair? Has Benn Senior even endorsed Benn Junior? I'm sure Mr. Blair would see it as a fitting part of his legacy if the hard left rallied around a pro-war, pro-fees, pro-New Labour candidate for deputy leadership.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#31)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:43:16 PM GMT

There is something slightly 'cult of the personalityish' over wanting to please Tony Benn. Since when has that been an important consideration when we're meant to be campaigning to influence the future of the Labour Party? You want to support a candidate from the unapologetic Right just to please his old man? How deferential!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#35)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 08:07:37 PM GMT

That isn't THE reason, it's just as good as any other. How do any of the candidates hope to influence the future of the party? They will be stuck with Brown's policy agenda for good or ill.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#55)

by grimupnorth on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:09:51 AM GMT

Tony Benn and Dennis Skinner both....Hilary benn was around long before Blair. I campaigned for him in 1983 when he was already a London councillor.At that time, he was definitely of the left.My guess is that he has become pragmatic but his values remain rooted in the Labour tradition.How could they not? I just don't think he's a Blairite demagogue like Blears .....the words decent and honest also spring to mind.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#69)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 08:23:45 PM GMT

Blairite Blears took Barbera Castle (One of the best PM's we never had) to local meetings, and Hazel was as red as her hair until '97, as she opposed the abolition of Clause 4.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#6)

by HenryG on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:13:16 PM GMT

Hilary Benn voted for top-up fees and trident renewal and has fiercely defended the war with Iraq. Benn is likely to receive no backing of any major trade union. He is unapologetic about PFI and his candidacy backed by the rightwing Labour students. The other day Benn was heckled for stereotypical remarks about women at a Fabians husting. I like the guy, but I'm under no illusion he is a Blairite not a Bennite.


Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#7)

by jkitleft on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:14:57 PM GMT

I wonder what the discussions are like in a Benn house?


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#8)

by otware on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:32:18 PM GMT

I agree actually. This is exactly the sort of backlash that will give the left a major setback. It's cutting off their nose to spite their face. Cruddas is the only candidate with a leftist agenda. If the left don't support him because he didn't support McDonnell where does it end? the Cruddas/Compass soft-left are an important and growing faction. They have the power to unite the left and the right. It is ridiculous to perpetutate disunity by voting for a Blairite just because his dad is a socialist. That's my opinion, anyway.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#9)

by HenryG on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:38:58 PM GMT

Although Jon Cruddas was the deputy candidate with the most supporters that voted for McDonnell, the clear majority of his parliamentary backers were voting Brown. At no point did McDonnell endorse Cruddas or vice versa. Some of the organisations backed both and others backed one or the other. I'd encourage people to read this very good article by Don Paskini on Lessons for the Left and consider some of the issues he raises. http://don-paskini.blogspot.com/2007/05/lessons.html#links


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#10)

by otware on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:47:37 PM GMT

that is a very good analysis.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#27)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:32:31 PM GMT

That is a brilliant analysis. Noone ever pretended Cruddas was of the same faction of the party as McDonnell. Only an idiot would believe it as simple as a static rivalry between a homogenous "left" versus a homogenous "right". There are sensible people of both left and right supporting Cruddas.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#39)

by jkitleft on Sat May 19, 2007 at 08:42:39 PM GMT

but today's 'left' and 'right' are different to the left and right of 10 years ago. The 'left' were people like Bryan Gould, the 'right' were people like John Smith. Now the left is the Bennite faction, with the right being the quasi-Blairite faction. They are both more extreme than the left and right of 10 years ago.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#11)

by grimupnorth on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:48:17 PM GMT

There is no point having a "leftist agenda" if you vote for a right-winger and deliberately help scotch the chances of a candidate who is on your side. The Cruddas camp got trade union backing as the unions were too lily-livered to officially back John McD.He has gained momentum by posing as "left." His campaign was dishonest and disingenuous That's why we're not voting for him. He talked the talk but utterly, totally, miserably failed to walk the walk. Cruddas is also an ex-Blairite.I wonder how ex .....Voting for Benn is a protest.Gordon will make sure the DL has no significance at all,anyway.For me it was benn or spoilt ballot


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#12)

by otware on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:54:16 PM GMT

I know Cruddas has not come out of this looking very good. But I don't see the point of making a 'protest' by voting for Benn, when doing so will just entrench the New Labour agenda. Even if Cruddas is a careerist fake (which I don't really buy), at least if he were to get a decent result it would encourage debate.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#15)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 05:00:02 PM GMT

Well we're having a debate aren't we? If all this achieves is putting pressure on Cruddasites to explain what makes him the 'left-most' candidate (which people keep telling me he is) then that would be a good thing on its own.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#28)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:33:34 PM GMT

There is no doubt he is the "left most" candidate. That doesn't mean he's a "leftist" in the same camp as McDonnell. Can you honestly not understand that?


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#34)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 08:05:09 PM GMT

Yes I can understand that.

Why the hostility? I am not going to vote Benn and specifically NOT Cruddas; I'm going to vote Benn NOT Cruddas, Hain, Harman, Blears or Johnson. I can see good reasons for backing several of them, including Cruddas. If others are backing Cruddas, good for them!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#36)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 08:17:48 PM GMT

Apologies if I come across as hostile, comrade, I am simply very confused by your positioning on this. You previously were a Cruddas supporter, but you stopped when you found out he was nominating Brown, and now you're supporting a more right-wing candidate. It doesn't conform to political logic. If you had always decided that Benn seemed a nicer character than Cruddas you would have been supporting him from the beginning of the competition.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#50)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 02:03:09 AM GMT

I'm not saying I don't think Cruddas is nice. Please believe me when I say this isn't an anti-Cruddas thing, anymore than it's an anti-Peter Hain thing! I did back Benn from the start. I moved to Cruddas later. I then moved to spoiling my paper and now I'm back to Benn. Odd, I agree. Political logical? I don't know. It's not a contest I'm much interested in. Never was. At one point I thought maybe me (as a McDonnell supporter) and the supporters of Cruddas, may owe each other something, so I felt it only fair to back him. That passed - but this isn't a backlash or sour grapes, just a change in situation.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#83)

by fluffymike on Thu May 24, 2007 at 10:32:15 AM GMT

I'm another McDonnell supporter who will be voting for Benn. If Cruddas had backed McDonnel in order to ensure a debate and election, then I'd have supported him for the deputy leadership - not because I'm generally very impressed by him but as an acknowledgement of his part in allowing us a leadership election. As he hasn't done that, I'm happy to support Benn - who I'd have preferred to support anyway, even if Mcdonnell had got on the ballot. The reason? Because the role of Deputy Ledaer is a sham role - there isn't any policy influence the person can wield, and the only real purpose for it would be to encourage the membership through communications and such like. On that basis, I think Benn is the most likeable, honest and even-handed candidate for that role. For the same reasons, Blears will get my second vote, and Cruddas might get my third. I used to quite like Hain till I saw him at the gay fringe meeting last conference, and his whole attitude and demeanour really put me off him. Harman seems to have only one policy - 'I'm a woman and we need a woman to balance a male leader'! Johnson - I'm just not sure about tbh. I think it will all be a matter of the top 3 votes each candidates get, with it being 1, 2 or 3 having little difference. anything else will probably be irrelevant.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#22)

by jonesythered on Sat May 19, 2007 at 06:30:06 PM GMT

Henry, As you probably realise, the deputy leader has no say over policy whatsoever. Therefore it's largely irrelevant what each candidate supports because all the policy-making will come from Gordon Brown - who, in case you hadn't noticed, has become leader without an election. Given the lack of a policy-making role, and given that Cruddas' voting record is roughly the same as the other candidates (with the exception of top-up fees and Trident), I think it's fairly unavoidable that people will treat this election as a personality contest in which Hilary Benn is likely to emerge victorious.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#16)

by HenryG on Sat May 19, 2007 at 05:09:23 PM GMT

Don't listen to me - here are the views of two others. Tony Woodley in the Guardian yesterday: Unite's joint general secretary, Tony Woodley, explained the decision to opt for Mr Cruddas as deputy leader: "He clearly understands better than anyone the problems facing working people in terms of job losses, housing shortages and low pay. "His election as deputy leader would be a tremendous step forward in terms of reconnecting the government with core voters, rebuilding the Labour party at the grassroots and forging the strong relationship between unions and the party which is essential to a fourth Labour victory. Ken Livinstone (yesterday epolitix) Ken Livingstone had earlier declared his support for Cruddas, praising the Dagenham MP's position against "Britain being saddled with the immense cost of developing a new generation of nuclear weapons". The London mayor also commended his stance on domestic issues including combating poverty, fighting racism, expressing support for better public transport and trade union links. "I am delighted to give him my full support," Livingstone said. "He will be a fresh voice helping to renew Labour at this important time." "Jon Cruddas has impressed me with his thoughtfulness and tenacity and I very much hope that Labour members will back him to become the next deputy leader of the party," he added


Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#17)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 05:12:42 PM GMT

Good for them.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#18)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 05:19:35 PM GMT

To be honest Henry, I posted this because I had previously posted a blog saying I would spoil my ballot paper, and if my name appeared on anything relating to Hilary Benn's bid after that, it might have been called into question. If other people want to vote for one candidate in order to 'punish' another, then feel free to debate that with them. That's not why I'm backing Benn. To be honest I only ever transferred my support FROM Benn to Cruddas because I thought that he and his supporters were a better source of potential nominations for John: I never found him especially convincing. Your quotations to a certain extent underline some of my concerns with Jon: rather like with Prescott in '94: he's kind of there for people with left instincts to vote for so they can feel happier about backing Brown (in '94, for Brown read Blair).


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#19)

by HenryG on Sat May 19, 2007 at 05:42:53 PM GMT

'To be honest I only ever transferred my support FROM Benn to Cruddas because I thought that he and his supporters were a better source of potential nominations for John' I think that just somes it up! :-)


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#21)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 06:14:01 PM GMT

Well I like to upfront about these things. The leadership is infinitely more important than the deputy, so - while we still had a leadership election - I made my deputy choices based on the leadership election. There no longer is a leadership election so I'll go back to voting for the candidate I like the most.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#30)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:40:27 PM GMT

We have a deputy leadership candidate who wants to make the position important through his progamme of renewal (which he may be able to implement if he is elected), i.e. through acts such as abolishing the position of appointed chair and making the deputy leadership an 'elected chair' role, and refusing to accept a cabinet portfolio so that he can instead concentrate on representing the grassroots to the very top of government. But no you prefer to support Hilary Benn who - although undoubtedly a very nice man - has zilch ideas for Labour renewal. I am very confused by your logic. Oh wait, unless it is the case that you are simply doing this out of anger at Cruddas not nominating John McDonnell (even though that would not have made the slightest difference to McDonnell being on the ballot)


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#76)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 10:22:22 AM GMT

Again, I never thought Cruddas would nominate McDonnell. It was intimated that some of his supporters might and an 'exchange' only went one way, and I'm sure that has prompted some of the more strongly-worded stuff here and elsewhere. I agree with a directly-elected chair. I don't agree with turning the deputy leadership into a directly-elected chair by the backdoor, still bound by collective responsibility. I'm glad Jon has started that debate, but I want to have that debate, not be presented it as a fait accompli (which Brown seems to be heading towards doing anyway). I agree the Deputy should have a communicating role, and a role connecting with the party otuside parliament and that's why, out of the candidates available and what I've seen of them (and I'll be honest I've not heard a lot from Cruddas, even though I'm on his email list, so I look forward to hearing more) I think Hilary Benn is probably the best choice. If we were electing a role that had a significant policy aspect to it, then I would probably (grudgingly) support Cruddas, because his stated policy position is closer to my own.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#20)

by grimupnorth on Sat May 19, 2007 at 05:43:58 PM GMT

Hang on a minute here. Reality check.This illustrates my point entirely. Cruddas gets credit for standing up against nuclear weapons, low pay, etc etc and then VOTES FOR GORDON BROWN. Can none of you see the illogicality of that. If he and his supporters had stood behind John McDonnell as they should have done we would be having a debate precisely round thse issues. Tony Woodley should, frankly, be ashamed of himself.ASLEF, I see is nominating no-one for leader. Likewise UNISON in Scotland. Why? Because most of the union leadership failed to back their candidate, who REALLY understood about low pay, trade union rights, and public sector disquiet.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#23)

by WillParbury on Sat May 19, 2007 at 06:45:44 PM GMT

This thread should be preserved for future generations to demonstrate to them just how unremittingly stupid and hopeless the hard left of the labour party can be. For a generation they have failed to get hard left parliamentary candidates selected because they failed to convince other party members they had anything of relevence to say to the electorate. So when it came to get on the ballot they failed miserably. Firstly they pick a candidate who is about as much as a rebel as any member of the PLP ie most different from the majority of Labour MP's. Diane Abbott (a campaign grouper that I respect) even fessed up to John McDonnell being the wrong candidate on her Thursday TV slot. Remember they didn't have to convince half of labour MP's or even a third. They couldn't even get 12.5%. In other words they could ignore 87.5% of the PLP and still get on the ballot paper but even that was beyond them. Instead of some introspection on this woeful failure of organisation and ideas they blame Jon Cruddas for failing to secure McDonnell his nomination. This is pathetic beyond belief. Cruddas has a distinct and interesting agenda which is more leftwing than some on the right of the party but it would be wrong to describe it as hard left. So if his agenda is not the same as McDonnell's, he has not promised his support to McDonnell it seems a bit strange to expect that he transfer his support to him. Which wasn't going to happen anyway. Tom Watson voting for McDonnell, I don't think so. As a final coup de grāce we see huffy Mcdonnellites supporting Tony sorry Hilary Benn because they wanted his dad to win in 198whatever. Instead of taking the honourable course of action of abstaining they go and put on the ballot another Blairite who represents everything they reject as hard lefties. I could call this insane but frankly that would be derogatory to the mentally ill.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#24)

by doctordunc on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:10:10 PM GMT

Is it beyond comprehension that I might just want Hilary Benn to be Deputy Leader? I never thought Jon Cruddas would back John McDonnell, so 'this thread' has nothing to do with that. If others want to debate the 'hard left' 'punishing' Cruddas, feel free - but that isn't what this thread is about.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#29)

by Sensible Comrade on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:36:51 PM GMT

"Is it beyond comprehension that I might just want Hilary Benn to be Deputy Leader?" You hate New Labour and your supporting one of the New Labour candidates? Yes that is beyond comprehension. I honestly think your emotions are getting in the way of sound political analysis.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#49)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 01:47:37 AM GMT

Emotional responses are politically valid.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#59)

by WillParbury on Sun May 20, 2007 at 02:11:34 PM GMT

They may be "valid" but it doesn't stop them being illogical.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#86)

by doctordunc on Mon May 28, 2007 at 06:41:26 PM GMT

Why?


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#32)

by Mikael on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:47:32 PM GMT

"Diane Abbott (a campaign grouper that I respect) even fessed up to John McDonnell being the wrong candidate on her Thursday TV slot."

I wouldn't consider anything she could possibly say about John McDonnell seriously; especially not if she says it when sitting on sofa with Michael Portillo. Furthermore, I'd situate Abbott on the right of the Campaignh Group and classify her as a light-Brownite!

She most likely nominated John under the pressure of her CLP - or in order to allow a contest to take place . That was the right thing to do. Ann Cryer - a woman who clearly listen to her CLP - is another example of someone who did the right thing. I would of course have preferred that they had nominated out of genuine conviction, but you can't win 'em all, I guess. what's most important is what you make of the future - the future, and the future of the Party, belong to the Labour Left and principled Socialists, such as John McDonnell!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#33)

by HenryG on Sat May 19, 2007 at 07:57:57 PM GMT

Look mate you were well short of the 45 nominations and you're even slagging off some of the people that DID actually nominate McDonnell!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#38)

by Mikael on Sat May 19, 2007 at 08:41:42 PM GMT

Slagging off??? You imbecile. I criticised Abbott, it's not first time I have, mind you! The fact that she nominated doesn't make her a saint. I praised her courage and that of Ann Cryer. You're gonna have to do better if you wanna score a few miserable "debating points"... mate!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#60)

by WillParbury on Sun May 20, 2007 at 02:19:01 PM GMT

"She most likely nominated John under the pressure of her CLP - or in order to allow a contest to take place ." This is silly. Luke Akehurst is a member of her CLP can't see him pressing for a McDonnell nomination anyway she has just won reselection has she not so she can do what she wants. Many Labour MP's have paid no attention to their CLP's why should Diane Abbott be any different? Sh e may have wanted a contest because she values democracy in the party rather than pressure from the deputy vice chair for paper clips and minutes. If that kind of pressure worked we wouldn't have invaded Iraq and several former Labour MP's would still be in the house.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#61)

by Mikael on Sun May 20, 2007 at 02:42:22 PM GMT

"She may have wanted a contest because she values democracy in the party"

I did acknowledge that possiblity, didn't I? Maybe you should have read the quote you used to criticise me before you actually put forward your criticism.

In the quote which you included in your post, I said this:

"...or in order to allow a contest to take place"

which coincides with this:

"She may have wanted a contest because she values democracy in the party"

pretty much, if you ask me (and you kind of have)!

Pointless attack; it only serves to expose your provocative nature and poor "reading-skills"!.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#66)

by WillParbury on Sun May 20, 2007 at 06:10:54 PM GMT

Ha ha "your provocative nature" I've always wanted one of those. I see your reading skills have entirely missed the substantive point of my last post but do you here me grumbling?


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#67)

by Mikael on Sun May 20, 2007 at 06:45:55 PM GMT

I see your "writing-skills" are just a bad as your "reading-skills", old boy!

In this context, the "heer" (spelt phonetically) that you want is "hear" and not "here".

Finally, I understood your pathetic post very well, thank you. You accused me - and no doubt other labour Left-wingers - of being "factionalist infighters" amongst ourselves, yet I was simply criticisng Abbott - which is my right. That doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the fact that she nominated John. For example, Harry Cohen, who nominated John McDonnell, for which he deserves praise, was among the Labour MPs who voted in favour of exempting Parliament from the Freedom of Information Act, for which I criticise him.

Want to add anything, Parbury!?!


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#68)

by WillParbury on Sun May 20, 2007 at 08:13:10 PM GMT

I did see that very small spelling mistake as soon as I posted it. Alas my life has not degenerated to such inconsequential pendantry as to correct it for your benefit as it was perfectly understandable.

Further I never said that Labour leftwingers were "factionalist infighters." Why do you put it speech marks implying I said this when I did not? But then if the cap fits. You have already stated that you have a right to have a go at Diane Abbott. You might as well have a go at the other campaign group MP's as they can't organise 12.5% PLP support for a hard left candidate in a leadership election.

The post was actually about why Labour MP's ignore activists in their constituencies, something you entirely missed, but your posting is helping to explain.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#70)

by Mikael on Sun May 20, 2007 at 08:34:18 PM GMT

I put it within inverted commas (marks???) in order to emphasise the words in question - I don't know how to produce itallics, if you do, oh, please, enlighten me oh great Parbury!

Have a go??? What are you on about, you clearly do not understand anything! I already explained that I will criticise any MP, should I disagree with one or several of elements of his or her voting record or political positions.

I did miss your point about the importance of party democracy, true, but for understandable reasons:

1) Most of your base post was dedicated to take a swipe at me for having criticised Abbott (though you clearly didn't understand the reasons for which I did so) - which is my right. 2)You turned your own argument on its head by first suggesting that CLP pressured were unlikely to have had any effect on Abbott given that she was big enough to make her own decisions - and then your ridiculous argument about Akehurst; if you take a look at John McDonnell's campaign website, you'll see that a number of members of Abbott's CLP backe him, so pressures must have gone both ways - and then claiming that MPs should pay greater attention to their CLPs (suggestion with which I agree). So, you argument was both contradictory and nonsensical (bravo!) - given the Akehurst remark, I would be tempted to call a "Half truth" while I am at it, seing as to the fact that he, alone, is hardly representative of the majority opinion in Abbott's CLP (of which I know nothing, I must admit).


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#71)

by WillParbury on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:07:04 PM GMT

Using Italics isn't that hard for someone with your great learning in the English language you only need to use a bit of HTML.

As for saying that my base post (23) was a swipe at you this is completely untrue it doesn't mention you at all. Afterall you don't even post under your real name so how could I be taking a swipe at you?

My base post points out fallacy of campaign groupers whinging about Cruddas not nominating McDonnell when the real reason he didn't get enough nominations is because the hard left can't get any candidates selected.

"have a go at" is like "criticise" for people who don't use phrases like "old boy"

backe? seing? Glasshouses, stones need I say more .


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#72)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:46:36 PM GMT

Ignore Mikael - he likes to score points by criticising spelling mistakes, yet he's the biggest culprit. Sadly, his feeble brain has yet to develop any understanding of the real world and the policies that make it work best. Well, he is a Marxist though, so we shouldn't expect too much of him.


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#73)

by Mikael on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:06:58 AM GMT

Well, if only my computer skills were as advanced as my English skills, eh??? So tell how to use them (i.e. itallics) instead of showing off, old boy! I say, you'd do me more than a favour, old pal!

Listen, old chap, I was referring to post number 60 - which quite clearly was directed at me, since you quoted a line from one of my posts. In fact, I was unaware that you had posted anything prior to that - but now I see that it was a comment of yours that I had the misfortune of replying to!

Who are you to suggest that I don't post under my real name, Parbury? For all I know, your name might be Melissa Hunningdon!

As far a "Hard Left" MPs are concerned, let me ask you a question: Don't you realise that after ten years of New Labour the composition of the PLP is likely to be distorted in favour of the right?

Of course, my good fellow, "having a go at" someone means the same "criticising" someone - no problem there - yet I feel that it is, let's say, a bit harsher. I was hardly having a go at Abbott - trust you would notice the difference between me criticising and me "having a go"!

Now, let me return your question - but properly spelt and capitalised, of course: "Glasshouses? Stones? Need I say more?"


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#62)

by LiamM on Sun May 20, 2007 at 04:06:30 PM GMT

Yeah and you get credit where its due for backing McDonnell and then bizarrely back Benn! I fully supported McDonnell getting on the ballot paper but now totally despair at the sectarianism of the McDonnellites. If Cruddas hadn't been slagged off so much by you lot in the run up maybe he would have considered it. But objectively he is still the candidate for the left to back! Failing that, surely Hain is a better choice than Benn? Surely...


[ Parent ]

Re: A Bennite for Benn! (#63)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 04:47:21 PM GMT

Liam - I really don't think there was much slagging off of Cruddas from 'McDonnellites'. You're probably going to embarass me now with something I wrote in a weak moment... But there were criticisms of various candidates going in all directions, I really never saw anything of a sectarian nature. As a number of Cruddasites have mentioned on here: Cruddas is not of the same political persuasion as McDonnell, so no supporter of either party would expect the supporters of the others to be entirely non-critical. I think?


[ Parent ]

Re: DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! (#54)

by Curlew on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:06:15 AM GMT

Forgive me for appearing dumb - but why do we want to choose someone who we think represents our ideals and who supports policies we agree with, in the role of Deputy Leader?

You'll be putting one of your potential supporters in a position where they are completely impotent and have to agree with the PM at all times!

Put one of Brown's closest supporters in that role - and then forget about them - they can nod away to their hearts content. And as a bonus Brown can't claim he's working with both sides of the party ;-)

This is a phoney election and I'm not falling for it.


Re: DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! (#64)

by davidfloyd on Sun May 20, 2007 at 04:48:32 PM GMT

It's hilarious to witness the hard left's self-satirising conversion to dynastic politics. You may want to consider trying to get Michael Portillo to join the Labour and launch a challenge. His dad was a socialist, too and he's about as left-wing as Hilary Benn.


Re: DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! (#65)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:05:13 PM GMT

And see that straw man blowing away in the wind...


[ Parent ]

Re: DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! (#79)

by ChrisPaul on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:45:34 PM GMT

Will the DL have a seat at the cabinet table ex officio? Or only if also a Grade A1 Minister?


Re: DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! (#82)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 07:01:01 PM GMT

They'll be in the Cabinet whatever; it's in the constitution that the Deputy Leader gets an automatic Cabinet seat, whatever their job title.


[ Parent ]

Re: DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! (#84)

by jkitleft on Thu May 24, 2007 at 03:50:59 PM GMT

didn't know that. Question. If a deputy leader resigned from the cabinet on a paticular issue, would they have to resign their deputy leadership?


[ Parent ]

Re: DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! (#85)

by doctordunc on Mon May 28, 2007 at 06:39:38 PM GMT

Oh very good question! There is actually a potential contradiction between the Party constitution and British constitutional convention there, of course. What if Prescott had wanted to resign at any point? I think one reason why Prescott WASN'T persuaded to resign at a slightly earlier stage was that it was assumed it would precipitate a deputy leadership election which, in turn, would become a proxy leadership election or might even have precipitated a leadership election earlier than Blair wanted. In theory, collective ministerial responsibility would take precedence over the party constitution (and therefore the deputy leader of the party is as much bound by it as any other cabinet member). However, no leader would want to lose their deputy in those circumstances, especially a deputy who may well have more legitmacy than themselves (i.e. in this case when they will have actually been elected). However, the leader - while Prime Minister - has such powers of patronage (both for all members of the Cabinet, including the deputy, but also for their parliamentary supporters) that I can't see any of the current clutch of candidates exercising much - if any - influence over Brown, despite this rather unusual state of affairs.


[ Parent ]

Re: DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! (#87)

by jkitleft on Thu May 31, 2007 at 05:34:52 PM GMT

because I know when Jenkins led the 1971 EEC rebellion, he resigned, but does it become different if Labour are in government?


[ Parent ]

DoctorDunc: A Bennite for Benn! | 87 comments (87 topical)