John - great to hear from you.

You (and I) remember Jim Callaghan.  His government was about as (in)competent as Gordon's, but he was widely liked.  He lost the election and Labour were out for 18 years.  So if Gordon leads Labour into the election, we could be seeing over 20 years before Labour get back in.  Which in practice could mean never because Labour has never, except in 1997, won without the Scottish vote.

Is that really what you want?

//So my message to Labour MPs is this – let’s take a break from feeding Westminster gossip and hostile press prattle, recharge your batteries and if you want to campaign, get out in your constituencies and start campaigning for that fourth term.

That’s what our party wants and what our country needs.//

An excellent setiment and one delivered exactly the correct way - online and directly. Good for you John, now if you could only persuade your colleagues to follow suit... 

Whilst it is admirable to show loyalty to ones leader there is a time when it is better to put party and principle above loyalty, however painful that may be.  The real sense I see is that people have simply had enough of Gordon Brown and the Labour government and defeat seems inevitable.  Perverse though it may seem, it is better to head quicker for the opposition benches and get to the stage of rebuilding the party and its policies than to go through years of damaging decline as we saw in the closing years of the Major cabinet.

I would get radical and in view of the economic woes, try and get Vince Cable on board and plan on a government to last one year.  This would show a radical change and a willingness to change politics and could help ensure that the defeat is not crushing thus ensuring a meaningful spell in opposition and a chance to make an impact and come back to fight another day.  It also would give the Tories less time and force them to play their hand sooner.

A lot of what appears in the newspapers about leadership battles and coups and such is down to MPs spending too much time talking to themselves and not enough time listening to people in the wider world.

Many thanks John, please do come back

Alex Hilton
alexhilton@gmail.com
07985 384 859

Totally agree John, very well put.

People should be fighting the Tories.

Please everyone get behind our leader.

I bet you never thought John Prescott would end up blogging but I felt this was the best way to talk to ordinary members at this important time. 

I think a lot of us hoped you'd just fade int the sunset clutching a can of Carnation milk.

I'm slightly puzzled by the title of your post referring to "a fourth leader".

Blair, Brown... so who would have been number three?

Single digit figures, John...

"party members and the public will never forgive MPs and others who force Labour to go through another leadership election in less than two years"

There wasn't a leadership election - it was a coronation.  What the public will probably not forgive for 20 years or more is leaving the most unpopular PM in history, who has never been elected, in charge of this great country when he clearly lacks the management and leadership skills to do so.

If you want to guarantee that Labour is out of office for at least the next 20 years, keep Gordon.

I'm going to play a little devil's advocate here...

First of all, Mr Prescott welcome to LabourHome and be aware that there are Tory supporters as well as Labour supporter on this website [I'm one of the Tories]

I'm largely here for the debate and definitely enjoy doing so.

I am very very pleased that a titanic New/Old Labour figure such as your good self has taken time out from your still busy MP diary to talk to the ordinary members of Labour and to be able to put yourself here onto the net to be open to more blunt critique, something you yourself are not always afraid to wade into.

I do hope that you will reply to some of the comments left here and become more of an integrated blogosphere member much like Tom Harris.

For those who moan at John talking about a "Fourth leader" I think he is predominantly going on about when he came into proper influence within the inner circle [1994] which was under John Smith, because of his failed leadership attempt in that year he became the deputy leader.

 ----------------------

Now, moving onto the points. I agree with you, but voter anger goes a little deeper than Brown and this is something many LabourHome members here aren't getting.

This, quite simply is down to a few things....

 The problem of the economy isn't just a global problem totally outside ofthe government's control, and statements from Brown telling us to save our crusts etc [when waste per person is 4p a day] is completely pointless and little more than a showy gesture.

The only real and tenable option is to start finding a way of lowering taxes slightly at first and not showy gestures which do little more than rack up debt.

This frees up more money from the state and puts it back into their pockets as times become harder.

Public spending has also leapt out of control with the end of the economic cycle and this needs desperately looking into by a man with competent economics under his belt [I.E not Darling]

The other problem right now is, what does Labour Stand For?

At present many of the ideas it's enacting are either ultimately proving unpopular [such as 42 days ultimately has and the 10p placitation loan which has to be paid back eventually.]

Or has already been claimed months before by the Tories [The benefit reforms, inheritance tax, etc etc.]

It's all very well and good now that you do ask for the MP's to go out and campaign, but what do they campaign on as a genuinely serious question to you Mr Prescott, what should they go out there and do?

So far, as the local elections have shown, Labour campaigned in a half hearted manner due to hubris [as happened here in South Derbyshire] and promptly lost many councillors, and despite Labour getting it's act together since then, it's largely relied on leaking information that's supposedly "Damaging" to the Tory councillors, but is instead proving popular amongst the populace.

Or campaigned on a "Vote Tory, get Thatcher, she shall rise from the grave to consume you!" at which point many people promptly voted Tory. Infact they voted Tory so much that their councillors now outnumber Labour ones approximately 2 to 1.

With things looking so bleak politically [many always remember that Councils swing before the government does] it's no wonder that MPs are sharpening theoretical knives.

What they need, either way, is a rallying figure that seems to have some zeal around him. You've known Gordon for many many years Prezza, you know in your heart of hearts wether he has that zeal, and you also know how to get him out of his shell and at least into a decent fighting retreat instead of trotting out the same "Getting on with the job" phrases.

John,

You say that none of the current cabinet have the experience to be able to be Prime Minister.

This is manifestly not true. By the terms on which you yourself campaigned in 1997, most of the shadow cabinet at that point had had no experience of government (with one or two exceptions including yourself). Tony Blair had only ever been in opposition and yet he went straight from this to being PM. I recall at the time the "inexperience" point being made by Tories and the media and it was consistently brushed aside by yourself and your senior colleagues.

Every single member of the cabinet today has more government experience than Tony Blair had on May 2nd 1997.

Jack Straw has been Home Secretary (4 years), Foreign Secretary (4 years), Leader of the House and now Justice Secretary. In my living memory, only Jim Callaghan acceded to the office more qualified.

David Milliband worked alongside Tony Blair for several years and has since been Environment Secretary (vitally important ministry nowadays) and Foreign Secretary. He is amply qualified to accede.

Alistair Darling has held numerous cabinet posts in the last 11 years.

I could go on but I am sure you understand what I am saying.

I am not advocating any one of these individuals but the idea that there is nobody who could take over is insulting to the many talented men and women who make up the cabinet.

Can I, as someone commonly regarded around here as an Evil Selfish Tory, make a point that everyone else seems to be missing (not just here but in the wider debate).

Gordon Brown must be under incredible pressure. Being PM is bad anyway, but having to cope with two wars, global economic meltdown, dismal poll ratings -  I don't think it would be any exaggeration to suggest that he must be under more stress than any PM for decades. And if the press reports I read are true, he might not be coping well.

Regardless of  the effect on the country, or of the Labour Party's electoral prospects: does anybody, friend or foe, really want to see the man driven to a nervous breakdown? Is anything worth that? John Prescott says that Brown is the most able person in the party to lead the country. Maybe he's right. But God, we're talking about one of the country's two major political parties. Even if not as experienced or able, there must be someone else. What if he did have a breakdown? What about a heart attack or a stroke? Who would you choose then? It's for sure you wouldn't just say "Well, Gordon was all there was", call a general election, give in to whoever won and all quit politics.

The man wants to serve his country. Good for him. But there are limits to what the country is entitled (and would want) to ask of him or his family,  and I genuinely wonder whether these limits are being reached. Note also that one of the symptoms of being pushed to the limit (and I've been there) is precisely the inability to realise what is happening to you sometimes until it's almost too late. Some people never realise at all.

John, if you're reading these comments, you are the ideal man to check. Nobody could accuse you of disloyalty or of personal ambition if you started talking to people - quietly, and off the record. Talk to his cabinet colleagues. Talk to his family. And talk to him personally. And if you do find that the demands being made of him are taking more than the rest of are entitled to ask, get him to quit. For his family's sake if not for his own.

I am not a Labour supporter - I am a Blair supporter. Sorry if this rankles somewhat with some of you, but I am presently disenfranchised for reasons that are pretty clear at my blog. (Google "Keep Tony Blair")

I recently put together a bit of fun called Labour Wiki 2050. Hopefully you people can avoid it coming true. It would be dreadful to think that New Labour was in the end no more than a blip.

Death of Labour and Wiki entry 2050

As things stand it really is difficult to know WHAT Labour can do. You can hardly give us another leader and PM, who would likely only be interim and go down to defeat anyway, unless Cameron's Tories fluff it. And you already know the press would crucify you if another coronation were held. The public, who ALWAYS listen to the press's screaming headlines, caused you (largely) to lose the BEST leader you ever had. They then smiled incongruously while you found (arguably) the WORST one.

Perhaps you need to think ahead and see if you can catch out the Tories on something upon which they are soft - like 42 days' detention. Oh no, forgot. Many of you are soft on that too.<