Labour Deputy leadership: Question Time reaction

[matgb]

Watched Question Time last night with SB for the Labour Deputy Leadership contest. Took many notes, might try to write some coherent thoughts up on the whole debate, was very interesting. Following Sue's statement of preferences:

1. Jon, 2. Peter, 3. Alan, 4. Harriet, 5. Hilary, 6. Hazel
I did it based on the following, and in this order: (1) my opinion of how little they were likely to toe Gordon's line, (2) excessive toadying under Tony (3) voting record (4) school and (5) amount of union support.

I thought I'd summarise my thoughts. I don't have a vote, but some of you might (I know at least two do).

Biggest issue is how the Dep Leader will affect Labour's prospect at the next General Election. Unless things change drastically, I currently predict a Tory landslide; that has to be stopped. My personal ideal vote would, fairly obviously as already stated, be a hung Parliament resulting in a Labour/Lib Dem coalition prepared to actually carry out the necessary fundamental constitutional reforms we were promised in '97 and that Brown is hinting might actually now happen. On top of there's a personal factor, who comes across well and would be someone I (and other left-leaning liberals) could possibly work with. So, given I don't have a huge amount of time: .

• Cruddas: Essentially he has the easiest ride of all the candidates; he's not in office, and can absolve himself of mistakes. He came across well, and genuine; he admitted mistakes, appeared both honest and forthright, rejected an "Old Labour" tag and stuck to the issues. I liked him, and disagreed with him less than I thought I would.


• Hain: Felt Peter dropped the ball on a number of issues, didn't push his belief in constitutional reforms even when there was an open goal in the questions, and the obviously anti- Labour opening question was fumbled very badly I thought, just didn't make sense.


• Johnson: Came across very well, and I was once again impressed, gave good answers and explained his positions well, I think I disagreed with him the least.


• Harman: Too slick. Too practiced. Too pat. Jennie thought her "I'm the woman candidate and we need a woman deputy because we need a woman deputy" answer was both patronising and pathetic. I concur. But, she did actually answer many questions well and made a few very good points. Especially agreed with her on Guantanamo.


• Benn: As usual, OK, likeable, but nothing really grabbed me, I expected to like him the most except Cruddas, but this wasn't to be.


• Blears: Well, what do you expect? Nothing impressed, she ducked questions, obfuscated, fumbled and came across incredibly badly; career aparatchik, nothing more

Overall, I think Johnson won the debate, with, scarily, Harman second; she did well against Dimbleby as well, especially when he was being a bit sexist. I could live with Cruddas or Hain, but he really needed to up his game, and my intense dislike for Blears became stronger. I hope for Johnson, but think Harman has a strong chance, and she made a blatent play for Cruddas's second prefs near the end, a little too obvious for my tastes.

Will possibly transfer more thoughts as to the positioning elements, but really, if you are in position of a Labour vote; think carefully, as this one will make a huge difference to electoral chances, and I really really can't stand the idea of a Cameron landslide, which I think is what someone like Blears will help lead to.

Off now, Bradford and Soylent Green beckon...

Comments

[tyrell.livejournal.com]

Fucking Blears. Only thing worse would be Margaret Beckett.

I remember taking great offence at something Hilary Benn said or did, but I can't remember what it was now. Cruddas or Johnson look good. Don't like Hain.

[burkesworks.livejournal.com]

While Alan Johnson comes across as a reasonable, affable sort of fellow, some of his statements have been worryingly Blairite. Take for example, his view on ID cards;

"It is my view that ID cards, and the database which would hold the information, would play an important role in this. In addition, ID cards have other potential uses- including in determining entitlement to public services and in combating identity theft."

Standard brand blathersgate there.
On the other hand, he is clearly the one candidate most in favour of proportional representation, and unlike Cruddas has spoken against BME shortlists - which given the town I live in and its history of "treating' at local elections is A Good Thing.

Of the others; Hain has been surprisingly impressive in the talk, but unfortunately many of us know he has a history of not walking the walk to match. Cruddas has impressed, too; as the only backbencher he has little to lose here, and has mentioned "creeping authoritarianism" in passing though for me he stops short of rolling back some of the worst Blairite legislation. I can see him being the most effective linkman between the PLP and the "ground troops' in the constituencies and unions by some way, though. Harman has come across as somewhat bland and lightweight, though with one or two good points, and for me the big disappointment has been the rather dryasdust didactic Hilary Benn, who despite being the member that I'd be able to have the best conversation with, would come across as political anathema. Blears is merely beneath contempt.

Finally, the findings from this straw poll (http://fabians.org.uk/events/hustings-07/report) at a hustings is worrying indeed, though admittedly the event was hosted by the Fabians.

FWIW, given that I come from much the same libertarian wing of the Party as you (although much more hostile to LibLabbery), here are my hypothetical votes based on both the sausage and the sizzle;

1) Cruddas
2) Hain
3) Johnson
4) Benn minor
5) Harman
666) Blears

[tyrell.livejournal.com]

Glad I'm not the only one who feels that way about Blears.

[caramel-betty.livejournal.com]

I heard some pollsters the other week, and the money appeared to be on a four candidates eliminated before a Johnson and Benn showdown. But, pollsters being what they are, no-one has done any thorough polling on lower down preferences, so no-one knows what will happen if there are some surprise early eliminations (e.g. Benn being number 2 on a hell of a lot of lists, but being sufficiently low down in 1s to get eliminated in the 2nd or 3rd round). The transfers will, undoubtedly, be bizarre, horrifying and fascinating, in equal measures.

[bagrec.livejournal.com]

Well I'm actually voting in this: at the moment it goes something like-

Hain, Harman, Crudas, Benn, Johnson, Blears.

Their views on faith schools as outlined by Labour Humanists helped enormously in this.

[matgb]

I had planned to follow the campaign closely through the blogs, same way I did for the Tories and then the Lib Dems, but life and disinclination struck. Annoyingly, I haven't been keeping up with Labour Humanists at all recently, shame, damn fine blog overall, really should look into finding an equivalent for the Lib Dems.

But good to see Blears in the correct place in that list; comment made at the dinner Ijust came back from: She made Peter Hain's skintone look positively normal. Ah well.

Why Johnson so low, if oyu don't mind me asking?

[bagrec.livejournal.com]

I like Johnson, I like all the candidates truth be told, I certainly don't loathe Blears with the near psychotic ferocity that some do (which seems even weirder after hearing an hour of Nick Griffin on Radio 5 yesterday - now there's somebody who deserves some of the opprobrium wasted on Hazel).

I just like the other candidates better.

[0ct0pus.livejournal.com]

I'm surprised at myself, but I'm in the Harman camp here. I've always been kind of mildly impressed with her, even back in her (probably over-promoted) social security days. She's come across well in the various hustings - yes, she's slick and professional but given Gordon's aptitude in that area perhaps this is a useful strength. And she's done a hell of a lot for someone not often in the public eye.

[matgb]

I always liked Harman, but didn't think she had the raw talent; you're right that she could act as a perfect Brown counterpoint, which would be good.

[0ct0pus.livejournal.com]

I think I also like the fact that it was her husband (Jack Dromey) who dropped Tony in it re: cash for questions. Talk about an anti-sleaze candidate!

[raggedhalo.livejournal.com]

Through my GMB membership, I went:

1. Cruddas
2. Hain
3. Harman
4. Benn
5. Blears
6. Johnson

Alan Johnson is the Devil incarnate, as far as I'm concerned.

[matgb]

Any specific reason for that last? I don't tend to get too involved in the personality side, and I sort of stopped following education policy once I realised that a) it would really annoy me and b) they were going to do stupid things I hated regardless, so trying to follow it made me scream a bit too much for an issue that no longer really includes me.

[raggedhalo.livejournal.com]

I'm still (technically) on the National Exec of NUS and thus can't disengage myself from education politics until Sunday. And given that Johnson is, aside from being a slimy Blairite, the architect of the Higher Education Act 2004, I can't do anything but demonise him.