I have just had an article published on Comment is Free in the Guardian explaining why I think it is time for Jeremy Corbyn to leave as leader of the Labour Party.
I am well aware that there will be those who will not like me saying this, but as I make clear in the article, my regard for Jeremy as a person remains strong, but the issues needing to be addressed are more important and it is clear that he can no longer command the authority to do that, like it or not.
This is a moment for calm heads, a clear focus on the need for a strong and effective opposition that offers a real alternative to the nonsense of austerity and a team that can deliver that. I may be optimistic in thinking such a team can be created, but like others I have reluctantly concluded that Jeremy Corbyn cannot lead one and felt I had a duty to say so.
I await the comments that will follow.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I am reluctantly beginning to believe this, Keir Starmer’s resignation and your essay perhaps being the turning point. But who will be the better replacement? I would vote for Nicola Sturgeon over Jeremy, but we haven’t got a Nicola Sturgeon. If the challengers are Chuka and Tristan I’ll vote for Jeremy all over again.
Angela Eagle?
Owen Smith?
Maybe John McDonnell
John McDonnell will not stand. I will vote for Jeremy because he is an untainted politician, which is what we need. The test will be if the challenger would retain John as Shadow Chancellor, because it’s my belief that it isn’t Jeremy they don’t want, it’s his economic policies. Also I don’t believe that the tories will call another election soon if Jeremy is still in place, but they may be tempted if we end up with the same career politicians on both sides.
None of the above. Only way labour can win in current system is to elect leader who disappoints those who read this blog but grudgingly recieves their votes but connects with mythical mondeo man or whoever that now is.
Best option on that basis is Dan Jarvis. Former soldier, northern constituency, looks like a possible pm (yes that matters). Very difficult for Tories and ukip and media to attack. If put Boris against him it would be suicide.
(replying to Rick)
I would not support Jarvis. Keir Starmer yes, if he decided he was ready now. John McDonnell if he rose to the occasion, but surely he would never run against Corbyn, so it would have to be an agreed on swap between them. Owen Smith possibly, I’ll have to look at him more closely.
For what it’s worth, I live in one of the low income rural parts of Wales, and the UKIP voters I know respect Corbyn more than the rest of Labour. They hate the Blairites.
@momentary
Labour can only win any upcoming election from a centrist position. Those saying they would not support leader x or y and those strongly in favour of Corbyn are highly probable to be expendable votes under our current political system. Labour need to win a small number of swing voters in key middle England constituencies. It can afford to hemorrhage support on far left if it gains much smaller number of swing voters elsewhere.
This is the game as it is and how it must be played. We may all moan about Blair but deep down we would take him over the Tories.
Angela Eagle’s desperately poor performance in the referendum debate was enough to convince me of her inappropriateness. Labour’s failure in the referendum campaign was by no means Corbyn’s fault.
I think the Labour party has behaved in a petulant and childish manner for the last year. Any new leader will have to do much more than ape the Tories to get me to vote for it. I need a vision, and not a Blairite one.
But yes, Corbyn is a broken reed now and needs to stand aside.
It was Labour policy to do nothing on the referendum
That was his fault
Very reluctantly I am coming to a similar conclusion – however I think the Corbyn/McDonnell policy programme is fundamentally the correct programme and I would like to see John stay on as shadow chancellor. I just don’t think Jeremy is the best person to lead Labour going into an election. Currently working on an article for Compass on how this impasse might be resolved.
I agree re John – he is really taken on the role
Some will agree Richard and some will not, but I know you will accommodate rational views from either view. On this I disagree, I feel Corbyn has had to restrain his vision in chains for practical reasons in the first (say) year of managing in spite of a hostile PLP using Tory media against him. I feel the chance for radical change needed our patience to match his, and if we do not do that we fall for a trap neoliberals set for us when they initially set out to hinder and delay Corbyn just by them being being in his way as oyingly and ad long as possible.
Respect your view, but the basis of a new mood enabled by the one person one vote that enabled Corbyn us still there. Many will ridicule my next comment,but I do believe you may have announced you are prematurely giving up to the joy of those we strive to overcome on someone who still may prove to be the keyholder of the door that blocks the change we seek.
That is the last thing I am doing
As I have made clear, I am not a member of Labour
As someone who is not I am saying Jeremy cannot win now: like it or not (I’d rather not but I am also a pragmatist) if he cannot command hios partry then he cannot command the country
So a new leader is needed
I sincerely hope they offer a genuine left wing opposition or I will be very willing to criticise
‘I sincerely hope they offer a genuine left wing opposition.’
There is no-one to do this, there is a total absence of it like the cheese in the Monty Python cheese shop, you will not find anyone.
This is a recipe for years of Labour Overton Window huddling again.
You mean Corbyn was it?
That’s a bit pessimistic and something no one would have thought a year ago
Surely the whole point of this is that they won’t accept anyone who will offer ‘genuine left wing opposition.’ They never tried to work with Jeremy, not from the first day. As a party member I am appalled by what has happened and even though I would prefer someone who could unify the party to lead, if unifying the party means going back to standing for nothing but being electable, then I am out.
Please read what I read
Et tu Brutai.
Read it. Read it again. Re read it.
Sorry, Karen is 100% spot on. No problem with the suggestions as to what should be done, could be done, ought to be done etc in the article for that neo liberal cheerleading rag. But not only is there no one who the Blair cultists who dominate the PLP would support available with the necessary experience (all the leading players including Jarvis are from Progress and the obvious candidate of the current shadow chancellor is unlikely to stand in the actual circumstances which currently exist) who would follow such suggestions or programme so it’s not going to happen but it would also split the membership even further and probably end up with mass resignations and even more ordinary people disconnected from the political process.
The problem here is that it is not Corbyn per se they object to but what he stands for. Of course he’s not been effective since his election because not only has he had to contend with this establishment pretorian guard stabbing him in the back and constantly briefing and plotting against him from day one because they will never accept what he stands for, but the very paper you have used to perform the role of Brutus has conducted a vicious and sustained vilification against him and the values and programme he ran on and which everyone, including yourself Richard, wants to see.
Such an consistent onslaught day in day out, month in month out is of course going to result in a bunker mentality in even the strongest personality.
You say he has lost the support of the Party when it would be more accurate to say he has lost something he never really had which is the confidence of the PLP, who are not only acting like spoiled brats and letting a clueless Government off the hook but who are clearly saying they would like the current membership to resign in order to elect a new membership more to their liking.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion but nobody is entitled to their own facts and I’m really really sorry Richard. I’ve continued to read this blog and refrain from commenting but on this matter, at this time, you have got it wrong. Worse still the way this has been done, in the organ which has done more than any other to bring about the Brexit result with its sneering elitist disdain, which it shares with the Blair faction, for the communities which they have abandoned since the 80’s with their “moderation” and triangulation thinking that traditional base had nowhere else to go.
The country is in meltdown. It’s in clusterf*** mode. Things are falling apart, the centre cannot hold. The Union is in crisis. The ship is rudderless and cannot connect with reality. Each half of the voters last week are daily becoming adamant that they don’t want to live in the same country as each other because they have different and incompatable visions and conceptions of where we ought to be and where we ought to be going. It’s bloody poisonous out here in the street right now. That shambles at the end of Channel four news tonight was quite tame in comparison.
No one is now offering any alternative to the general melee of recrimination and rancour. I put personal feelings aside yesterday,because personal in my book is not the same as important, and went against 40 years of Groucho Marxism (never belonging to a gang that would accept my membership) and actually joined the bloody Labour Party to do my bit in the now coming leadership vote and hold my own MP to the same no confidence standards they are applying.
A day later we get this nonsense. It really is sad to see someone you look up to stab themselves in the back in this way.
Sorry, but thats me done here. No point in switching the light out on my way out, it’s already been thrown out of the pram. Bye, and thanks for all the fish.
You think I did this lightly?
Or that Owen Jones did?
I did it because I care for the harm that an ongoing Labour fight could cause
If you really can’t see that you really don’t care
Thank you Richard, we must all make our own judgment as to what we think is the best course. I thought Paul Mason’s article yesterday was the most compelling I have read, but then I retain my own confidence in the programme that Corbyn was elected to deliver, and all the more so in these changed circumstances.
What seems ironic to menis how everyone is telling us we have to accept the democratic will of the people albeit marginal when it comes to the referendum, but not, it seems when it comes to the Labour leader and his clear mandate from the membership. Democracy is a process and not a pick and mix.
Democracy embraces the idea that minds can be changed
Richard seem to miss that Corbyn’s importance is that he’s a counter-cultural figure and many young people like his ‘shyster-free’ credentials that very few MP’s have.
His lack of any adaptation to image and media needs is a vital ingredient in cultural change yet Richard calls for someone of the ‘familiar’ model: smart suit media savvy, soundbite merchant. This sets us back a long way if this happens.
I don’t see returning to Tory Lite as a ‘pragmatic’ solution, it will only lengthen the days of neoliberalism.
I’d rather Labour disintegrated and reselected which would be a messy process but one that would achieve greater reliability and future solidarity. Going back to the old Tory Lite is utterly useless even if they kiss the arse of the media and get elected.
Simon
If you really want a Tory government you are clearly opting for it
I don’t
I want a left of centre government but no way on earth one that delivers neo-feudalism
Richard
‘I want a left of centre government but no way on earth one that delivers neo-feudalism’
But Labour can’t do it, it is defunct, finito, a non extant Party, a charade of a Party.
It has helped to deliver neo-feudalism and a voter swing to the right, do you think it will suddenly morph into something else after Corbyn is gone? What you have written implies that.
Simon
I think I have got the massage that you do not agree with me
Richard
So, who?
McDonnell
Owen Smirh
Angela Eagle
Keir Starmer
When Keir Starmer was director of Public Prosecutions he joined in the ‘war on the unemployed by making benefit fraud liable to a prison sentence of up to ten years taking it out of the hands of the DWP and applying the fraud act:
“Benefit cheats in England and Wales could face longer jail terms of up to 10 years, following new guidance from the director of public prosecutions.
Keir Starmer QC said it was time for a “tough stance” given the £1.9bn annual cost of the crime to the nation.
He urged prosecutors to consider charging under the Fraud Act – rather than social security laws – because of the scope for longer sentences.
The prime minister’s spokesman said he welcomed the move.”
Given the context of this during the Tory attack on benefits and the marginalisation of those on benefits into social pariahs, I’d suggest this man not fit to lead the Labour Party by a long chalk.
(Not sure why this post was ‘censored’ first time round as it is informative rather than me repeating myself, so can’t see the logic of that)
This was not censored
I replied as I recall
And said you are asking for a politicised civil service
You are very wrong in almost all your judgements and have been lying (said quite deliberately) about my motives
I am not amused
If you could point out the ‘lies’ I’d appreciate that-I think what you mean I was drawing inferences and implications from what you are suggesting, which may be conceivably wrong but hardly ‘lies.’ I’m perfectly well aware that we share common anti-neo-liberal views and would not impute them to you but it is quite possible to say things that carry those implications without having that intention -If you think I’m wrong, fine but lying is another matter and hardly the right word.
I’m certainly not expecting a politicised civil service but a man of the Left should resign rather than support the intensification of harsh attacks on the most vulnerable.
Starmer’s comments about tax-payers money were riddled with misunderstandings about monetary operations and were pure Tory myth propagation. All this said during 2013 , the most intensive year of attacks on benefits with sanctions sky-rocketing and bedroom tax hitting hard -this man should have played no part in this, there is no reasonable justification for him taking this position, unless you think career interest should trump principles. I repeat, this man is unfit to be leader of a Labour Party.
I was deeply angered by the comments you made about my motives
You now say they were not true
I accept that
Richard, I do respect your contribution to the debate, but there are no other candidates that will prevent a PASOK-style slide into irrelevance. That is not to say that Corbyn will prevent that, but at least you know from his team there will be no racist triangulation or aping of Tory austerity. If they choose this path, Labour will be wiped out in the next election.
This reckoning should have happened months ago, but the craven and pathetic plotters sought to maximum damage at a moment of national crisis. They deserve nothing but everlasting our contempt and opprobrium for denying the members their democratic mandate and the people of the UK a chance to develop a different future, one not marred by racism, xenophobia and steep & rapid decline.
You are right on so much. On this, you are sorely mistaken.
No one can lead a party from where Jeremy is now
I want an opposition that can deliver real policies of the type I have alwYs described
If Jeremy cannot then Labour has to move on
Shall we be realistic?
Or give the far right a licence to govern
Dear Richard
Jeremy Corbyn is the first party leader for many years who has spoken for the vulnerable and dispossessed. As such he represents a threat to the wealthy backers of the Tory Party who see Corbyn as someone who might implement policies which give decent lives to the poor at the expense of those who can afford it. I know you are a thoughtful and accomplished expert on tax and it upsets me to see you joining forces with the enemies of social justice. The PLP conspirators represent the political establishment. It’s a real shame that you have chosen that side.
I have not chosen that side
Stop implying what I did not say
I said Labour needs a new leader who can deliver a radical policy
I am baffled – genuinely – that an argument for policies to the left of those Jeremy and John have promised has been so misinterpreted
None of the candidates you suggest support policies to the left of Jeremy Corbyn or John McDonnell.
I’m disappointed to see that you have added your voice to that of the Blairites in the PLP.
Read what I said
If you want to rude about all I have ever tried to achieve that’s your choice, but please don’t bother to comment again in that case
Richard, if I did not already respect your work I would have have had no cause to express such disappointment.
It’s a bit stiff, frankly, to wilfully step on many toes with this declared epiphany, yet react so over-sensitively when criticism of that epiphany, inevitable considering your readership, appears on your blog.
If my comments have overstepped the mark, then so be it, and I’m sorry to no longer be welcome here.
I hope we all get what we want in the end, by whichever route that may be.
I write honestly
I always have
If you don’t like it that’s your problem
But please do not question my motives
Jeremy Corbyn has never had the support of the PLP, with those on the right enthusiastically predicting his downfall, to whoever will listen (since the leadership election).
Jeremy does not believe that the lowering of living standard (of the majority) deemed inevitable by Thatcher and Blair is acceptable.
I think you would agree it is an orthodoxy that poverty does not stimulate economic growth and lower/middle incomes are being dragged down.
I don’t believe you are in good company; the people everyone suddenly thinks they should be talking to, those who’s lives have become progressively difficult since the eighties, are indifferant to smart,shiny performers.
Whatever his faults, Jeremy is the best candidate to improve life for the many, and the best chance of winning an election.
Re your last para, Jeremy may share the ideas better than anyone, but he cannot win, whether I like it or not
Not sure why my previous comment is awaiting moderation, and I don’t understand why you state that he cannot win: he has been doing pretty well in the latest by-elections, the London mayoral election and specially the referendum turnout for labour remain.
You have also discounted the fact there is a political vacuum at present,. So any any opposition could win now, “even” Corbyn?
If it’s waiting it’s because I am human
And what I have taken into account, having some experience, is that no one can win an election with thei parliamentary party opposed to them
Fact
I agree but for a different reason. It’s been clear from the outset that the BBC and others are constitutionally opposed to him for some reason and that makes his position appear untenable. On the other hand should our choice of leader be determined by the BBC? Obviously not, and for that reason I support his current position of refusing to budge.
The other obvious consideration is the support of the membership which makes the coup all the more pointless as the blairites don’t have a popular enough replacement. I guess that’s why they have gone for the assassination route instead of a straight challenge while they know they’ll lose.
I’m looking forward to a loyal shadow replacement, and de-selection of a large number of disingenuous red tories who are plainly lying in setting out their identical reasons which are demonstrably untrue.
In any case its a no-win for Blairites who will lose all the voters and supporters that joined in Jeremy’s wake. Perhaps they think they will make up for this by attracting disaffected Tory remainers?
Thing is – IF they manage to oust Jeremy now (and I was arguing for him to go on Friday) – then the right of the party – the free marketeers who think the only problem with Austerity is that it was imposed a bit hard – will have control of the party and they will *never* let it go again.
It will become the centrist party – the Tory-Lite – that you were outlining earlier.
and there will be no party of a progressive agenda because the Labour brand will suck up all the action. Left Unity will be left with 2500 members and the Greens with a few more and we are a right wing nation again.
IS this really what we want?
No, of course not
But that is why I have also argued Labour needs to go into Coalition
I have no way of knowing if it will, of course
Yes I agree. Any post Corbyn Labour party will be Neo Blairite (as most of the Parliamentary Labour party are Blairite career politicians). Then all the three major parties will be to the right of Ted Heaths Tories. In other words the ordinary working person (most of us) would be better off under Heath than we will be under NU Labour Mk2 or the Lib Dems. So much for centrist.
You seem to have forgotten the members elect the leader
This is my fear as well. And appears to be the plan. I guess really I want what Richard wants but I don’t believe it is possible at present. Corbyn slipped onto the ballot as the joke candidate, they will never make that mistake again.
Then n that case people know what to do
I do not agree with your analysis Richard but even if I did, this is neither the right time or right way in which to change the leader of the LP. It has completely let Cameron and Osborne off the hook. There was a disgusting spectacle in the HoC, with Cameron and the Tories jeering Corbyn and the LP, when Cameron should have been on the back foot over the referendum result.
The correct way to challenge would be to put forward another candidate and hold another leadership election. The aim of this co-ordinated ‘coup’ is to negate the democratic process. Richard Burgon MP spells it out:
‘.. the plan is to reconfigure the Labour Party’s membership to one at ease with their Blair-inspired politics through the tactic of disrespecting members and the democratic process to such an extent that members resign in droves. Don’t discount a strategy of trying to impose some sort of “caretaker leader” for a year or two until enough members have resigned in disgust to mean that a leadership election can then take place in which a candidate with Blair-inspired politics has a decent chance of winning.’
http://labourlist.org/2016/06/the-plot-to-oust-corbyn-is-anti-democratic-and-offensive-to-labour-members/
In my experience, the end does not justify the means. It invariably backfires and my fear is that this will mean any chance of removing the Conservatives will be at an end. I am surprised that you argue for replacing Corbyn without an alternative candidate having been proposed although I appreciate that you have some in mind as more suitable.
The end is opposition leading to election
As someone who is not a member of a political party but who has massive reasons to be concerned about what the Tories are offering I am not being tribal. I am saying exactly what I want and am hoping to have it
What I now know is that Jeremy Corbyn will never deliver it: that’s impossible if he cannot command his party in the House. It does not matter why they have stood against him in a sense: they have. But I would not have said anything if I did not think they had reason to do so
As someone who knows Jeremy a bit, and who likes him a lot, I can also say that the leadership has not worked for him. I wish it had, but now it has not the cause of being an opposition is vastly more important than the person
And let’s also be clear, like it or not John McDonnell has not followed the advice of any of his advisers so far so the prospect of a real left wing government under Jeremy as pretty remote because John remained fixated with a balanced budget
I’m afraid this seems a bit like treating the members as children who don’t know what they’re doing – not being smart enough. Times are changing and we need a principled leader. It’s nonsense that he was ‘lacklustre’ in the referendum – that was a word which was bandied about so much (or deliberately fed to the media) that the BBC used the word as a fact rather than opinion.
But the reality is he really has not managed the media or party well – I have heard ample enough to be sure of that
So the membership now need to choose someone who can deliver
Is that such an odd thing to suggest?
Don’t you think that’s a bit much, telling us what we must do? You are making a judgment that I don’t agree with.
And this is becoming a bit like the ‘Leave’ campaign – no strategy for post-Corbyn. By that I mean having any idea of who would be acceptable to members and affiliated unions as a replacement. I can think of no one at all.
I think that is all I want to say now.
I think that may be wise
Because I am arguing for the policies I always have to be delivered by someone who I rather hope will be able to win the support to deliver them
How hard is that to understand?
I am utterly baffled by the reaction to what I said: why are so many dedicated to destroying any hope of an alternative to a far right government?
Surely ‘the reality is’ (horrid phrase) that both the result of the EU referendum and that of the earlier election of Corbyn to the Labour leadership have shown us that people voting will choose something or someone they believe attuned with their own feelings and that too much immediate and glib focus on ‘delivery’ and supposed means to ends by those committed to the political machine (whose fringes you will perhaps be seen to be joining) is a considerable cause of our present mess.
If you are ‘utterly baffled’ then at least you have something in common with Tony Blair.
Try to debate and not be silly
I am surprised at your stance on this. You must know that this is an organised group of MPs who have never given Corbyn a chance. The fact that many have very different reasons for wanting rid of him suggests that something strange is occuring and some are taking advantage of a situation.
The reason I still want Corbyn as leader is because, (including the suggestions you gave above -McDonnell has said he would not run)he is the only one who believes in the many solutions you discuss here every day. Others may emerge later, but right now I dont think there is any one else.
Of course I want those solutions
But we also need an effective opposition
Much as we might like to be led by a Zeus-like figure who is a master of policy and soundbite, this person does not exist in the current Labour Parliamentary Party (to my knowledge). The only alternative is Neoliberal policies delivered by a media-savvy suit. Just hoping that someone perfect will just emerge from deep hibernation is just wishful thinking.
Also, if Corbyn has not been in touch with you that presumably means your main source of information is the same as mine; copious amounts of media mud laced with off-the-record briefings by his Neoliberal-supporting parliamentary opponents. In the end, mud sticks. Did you ever imagine that a leader arguing against the Neoliberal consensus wouldn’t be the focus of very dirty politics. Are you really convinced that you haven’t in some way been influenced by aspects of their underhand agenda?
It’s taken the establishment almost a year to refine and focus their attacks on Corbyn. If McDonnell had been at the centre of their cross-hairs, are you really sure you wouldn’t now be restating elements from their main arguments against him? To reiterate: mud sticks.
I did not have to rely on the media
I saw ample enough to form my own views
And I see no reason why the members of the Labour Party cannot think again
Respect you Richard but my concern is who replaces him. Hard to see it not being a Blairite who got us into this mess. Dark days and believe Jrremy has not been given a chance by his MP’s. Also convenient timing with Chilcott out next week.
McDonnell
Owen Smith
Keir Starmer
There are ample alternatives
Starmer in his previous role as Director of Public Prosecutions came out with some appalling stuff regarding the prosecution of benefit claimants which chimed in with the Tory line.
That may have been part of his job but I cannot forgive him for it -he should have resigned rather than give legal back up to a ‘war’ on the unemployed.
“Benefit cheats in England and Wales could face longer jail terms of up to 10 years, following new guidance from the director of public prosecutions.
Keir Starmer QC said it was time for a “tough stance” given the £1.9bn annual cost of the crime to the nation.
He urged prosecutors to consider charging under the Fraud Act – rather than social security laws – because of the scope for longer sentences.
The prime minister’s spokesman said he welcomed the move.
The BBC’s legal correspondent Clive Coleman said the changes meant welfare cheating would now be classed alongside offences such as money laundering and banking fraud.”
This the man you advocate as a possible leader-someone being crimsoned for earning a tenner cash in hand doing a neighbours garden so they can put food on the table?
(This is not a repetitive point but part of some background to Starmer-I can under stand you ‘censoring’ the other comments of mine that were repetitive).
So you want political civil servants?
I don’t think so
Sorry Simon, but if you think we should you are moving a very dangerous direction
Richard -the man is not a robot, yet he repeated some of the most trenchant myths of the Tories in what he said. He has the freedom to resign.
So you advocate for a man that put his career before his socila principles (if he has them)?
He could have said ‘enough’ and his resignation would have been a great boost to challenging the status quo and the manufacturing of consent around the hatred and marginalisation of some of the poorest people in our country -but no, he put his career first.
Sorry, Richard, to have spoken like this in 2013 and then to be taken seriously as a Labour leader is oxymoronic.
Simon
I do not have time for your comments at present
Sorry
Richard
Very suprised by this, Richard, as I think it’s the first piece of yours that I’ve seriously disagreed with. Im afraid the forthcoming is a bit of a rant:
“If fewer people are now connecting with Labour”
What? We’ve had a referendum where 2/3 of labour voters resisted the temptation to kick the government when it asked them to and followed the Party recommmendation to vote Remain.
“He has not grown into the job”.
After 9 months? I think Stephen Kinnock’s dad was given two full parliamentary terms, everyone else has been given at least one to “grow into the job”.
“who cannot do up his tie when necessary”
Perhaps some of his appeal to the 50% of Labour members who voted for him 9 months ago was a reaction against machine politicians who believe appearance is more important than principles.
“He has not provided a vision of what his leadership will deliver”
Again, after 9 months, which leader ever has?
“Not shown the ability to accomodate those who think along other lines”
Surely his current situation has been brought about by his willingness to include in his shadow cabinet a whole swathe of people from the old regime who are implacably opposed to him?
I find your conclusion that the Labour Party needs to address a disasterous referendum by the tories and their subsequent lurch to the right by ditching a leader who gained a 50% membership mandate only 9 months ago, in the hope that we might find for someone else, unspecified, with a bit more charisma, is baffling. Also, your belief that the people behind this coup could possibly have learned the lessons of the past and support policies we would both like to see. (Oh and I voted for Andy Burnham in 2015). Apologies if my anger, at the situation we all find ourselves in, is apparent.
Please read the article again
How did you miss all policy bits?
And why?
Oh, and there has been ample time for me to be quite sure
Good Morning Richard. Thank you for taking the time to reply to mine and many other comments. I have such good things to say about your writing usually that I think my husband suspects an affair, (and I really do have all your books). I have re-read. I think you are saying that Jeremy cannot win, (and therefore enact the policies you espouse, with which I wholeheartedly agree), because he has failed to overcome the hostility of the PLP. Obviously I disagree, but we’re allowed to do that. Could I just ask which left-winger(s)you feel have risen in standing enough in the last 12 months such that, even though they didn’t get on the ballot then, they could now lead the party to victory even after the damage done by this coup? Could you suggest links, please – I’d love to share you belief that there are people out there even better equipped to lead Labour to Government than Jeremy? Take care of yourself, this must be all absolutely awful.
Anne
Sorry it has taken so long to get to this: no cold shoulder intended
There is no one you will really want. My regret might be that Alan Simpson was not still there
The answer will have to be a compromise candidate. Angela Eagle might just work
Et tu, Richard? I understand your reasoning but disagree with your viewpoint.
If Corbyn is forced out, the lesson to be learned will be that a disloyal, self-serving and unprincipled PLP working in tandem with the massed ranks of the media can plot to remove any leader even if this means completely disregarding the wishes of the majority of party members. The endless drip, drip, drip of leaks from within the shadow cabinet, notably to the Guardian (whose non-stop attack pieces have been a disgrace), make the notorious ‘bastards’ of the Tory party look like saints in comparison. At least these Tory Eurosceptics didn’t resort to such underhand behaviour.
No doubt that Corbyn’s performance hasn’t been strong but then did he have any sort of a chance whatsoever? The PLP didn’t want him, resisted and attacked from the off and there was clearly no attempt to arrange any sort of cooperation or conciliation within the party. Added to the fully expected attacks from the right-wing media (which now apparently includes the Guardian!) then he was a dead man walking, so to speak, from the moment he was elected as leader.
I’ve never been a member of any political party (though did register as a ‘friend’ to vote for Corbyn), but I can’t see any way I could bring myself to vote for a party headed up by those as unscrupulous as the Blairite clique which makes up the PLP these days. The schemers within the PLP will probably manage to remove Corbyn by hook or by crook but, either way, I can’t see any way that the party will remain intact in the future. I can’t think of a single candidate I would vote for among the usual suspects who are plotting at present. Perhaps if they had put as much effort into campaigning for Remain as against Corbyn, the result of the referendum might have been a little different?
It almost makes me wonder if there really is some sort of a conspiracy to get rid of Corbyn before Chilcot is released?
I am not a part of a Blairite clique
Nor anything to do with Chilcot
But people I know and respect have resigned saying it has been impossible to work with the Corbyn team and I think that is very likely to be true
This is a management issue – and this team could not deliver an election and the ideas I believe in
I think I am entitled to say so
John McDonnell is only alternative – probably better one – providing he can get a chancellor as good as himself. But,and I think John knows it, Blairites hardly going to oust Corbyn just to get anti-Blairism. I feel that one trap being set is that the Blairites want McDonnell to make a move pretending they might embrace that,only to come up with more hard-ball nonsense once a Corbyn-shift was created to scupper McDonnell and Corbyn together.
Seriously think we have not to think about ownership of Labour now as much as maintaining a left movement. I had hoped Caroline Lucas would be in the shad cab today and wider signs of the movement and not the party might appear.
Still, even now as difficult as it seems, the members can beat the PLP but it means standing by Corbyn absolutely. In that scenario, Richard, once Blairites gone or going, it’s actually feasible to consider that Corbyn would be pragmatic about how to build a left force and in doing so evaluate from scratch who should be at the helm.
At that point, guys (and gals) like you would be right in the mix of devising what to do and hoiw to do it. But above all, we need to be as supportive and determined to get Corbyn through this vile mess as he himself is.
I have made clear that coalition is my answer, in opposition
I would certainly support a coalition but apart from with Caroline Lucas, a coalition with whom?
Nicola Sturgeon is unlikely to want to join such a force when she requires the prospect of ongoing Conservative government, in order to push through a Scottish independence vote.
From his Commons attack on Corbyn today, it was clear that Tim Farron is hoping to attract disaffected Labour and Conservative MPs…. so again unlikely to want a coalition.
I take your point from above, that if Jeremy Corbyn cannot gain the tacit support from the PLP for his overwhelming mandate, it will be very difficult. In other words, democracy in the LP will be reduced to the demands of (potentially) 200 MPs where the membership is of little or no account. As Blair and Brown intended, in emulating the US, the LP would continue to be hollowed out, relying on the left wing electorate to have nowhere else to go.
The Labour Party membership will choose the next leader
I suspect they will support someone with left of centre policies
Unfortunately Corbyn is an electoral liability he has had a year or so but has not got his vision across there is no real enthusiasm for him over the electorate at large.
No surprise when you see how he has been treated by the media. And he has only been in office 9 months. If you don’t know that you are obviously not a Labour supporter and haven’t been following Jeremy’s progress with any enthusiasm.
I can’t imagine the media loving anyone remotely left-wing. Wait and see how they big-up the blairite candidate(s).
If there is to be another Labour party leadership election within such a short space of time, then in my view (and I am not a member so have no real interest) Corbyn should stand for re-election to see if the party members still give him their support.
If they do, then the wisdom and direction of those that have called for another leadership election should be questioned in full. Some have clearly never fully supported the view of the party members in the last election and gone out of their way to undermine their own party interests.
In which case if Corbyn wins again, perhaps it is time for those disloyal members in both houses to voluntarily step down themselves or be replaced in their constituencies or seats!
If there is no personal risk to those MP’s and Lords who are continually disrupting the leadership direction agreed by the members, I can see this saga repeating itself many times before the Blairites eventually either regain control or exit the party.
So put up or shut up or leave would seem like the right approach to me.
If Jeremy is re-elected Labour will split
That may be what people want
But we will have a Johnson government and I have a duty to my children to tr to get a government that acts in the interests of most in this country
The two party system is broken so I see no reason to keep patching it up by forcing both the labour and tory party into a centre ground neither wants to inhabit. The constitutional crisis of the referendum should be used to reform the electoral system and let the reds and the blues split into their multicoloured elements creating at least three major parties and a number of special interest parties, in my opinion.
But we get a far right government first that may seriously harm people in the UK for a long time
I don’t think any extreme party could take power under PR, whereas today it can under the disguise of one of the main two parties and their constant internal battles. While I fully accept the risk of the tories shifting right in their policy making, now is the perfect time in my view to use the constitutional crisis created by the EU referendum and the likely threat to split up the UK into its nation states to force through electoral change to prevent either major party ever having a stranglehold on the country again.
Hear hear
Absolutely. Support Corbyn we get to coalition and a clean slate to start radical process and complete expanse of debate and wider involvement, don’t and we get stopped by neoliberal antics, is my instinct.
To add: once past Blairite problem, McDonnell free of ‘balanced budget’ chains.
I see no sign of it
And do you really think Labour will cease to have a diversity of views?
I believe that John Mc uses ‘balanced budget’ as a tactic, knowing full well that when he takes over the economy will be in crisis and that objective will be dropped. That is how I interpreted his words: balanced budget if possible.
I wish I could agree with you
There is no one who has lost his party who will ever win an election
That is the reality that has got to be embraced now, like it or not
We are in interesting times when what has seemed impossible has happened.
My Corbyn has had time enough to have a passionate sense of purpose to drive home ideas that oppose the government. I have not seen that drive or determination that good leaders have. Calmness and decency yes, but some enthusiasm also needed. Mr McDonnell has been far more professional, on the ball whilst not forgetting core Labour values. It is just my little insignificant view that this man is stuck in a time warp of long ago, have to evolve a little, And I feel perhaps he was disingenuous about the EU, not giving it priority. Apologies to him if I am wrong. Keir Starmer please, just have to get beyond the knighthood, will allow it just this once.
Sylvia, you really think 9 months is long enough to change the whole direction of a party whilst also fighting your own MPs? I think Corbyn’s manner harks back to an age pre-spin and Blair, but we have to get over this and listen to the message. If Mcdonnell was ever elected, he would have the same opposition as Corbyn from this disloyal bunch. On the EU, he gave a honest but passionate view about the dangers of Brexit. Once again, he does not do spin.
I am a little tired of the way some possible candidate names are flung around. In my view Keir Starmer has done little to warrant being selscted as a candidate.
Yes, nine months is long enough
I have to say that from what I have seen I am afraid
I am somewhat surprised by this Richard. You seem to have crossed line of sorts here.
I have read you Guardian article and my opinion is that like many who think Corbyn should go I am still unclear as to what you and they constitute as ‘leadership’.
I actually believe that those advocating Corbyn’s departure do not know what they want. What do you want? Someone who just exchanges insults with the PM?
A bruiser? A liar? Bullshitter?
I do not see anything being suggested that is a convincing or compelling vision of an alternative. You seem to want more of the same. You have spoken about the need for calm heads. This seems a bit desperate really.
And what have you to say to the membership?
Finally the more worrying element for me is you. I am worried that because you have involved yourself in this issue, you may end up having less influence and be seen as untrustworthy by a future leader. You may have tainted your reputation, your objectivity.
I think you have made an error. You should have stayed out of it in my view. Your political independence was key to being taken seriously and influencing that way.
You must know something I do not because I can’t get my head around what you have done at all.
Keep out of politics and stick to putting forward the robustly argued alternative ideas you are known for.
What will happen now will happen whether there is a new Labour leader or not. I hope that I am wrong and please forgive my reaction.
I am baffled
I used my article to put forward clear arguments and called for a government that may be able to deliver them. You should be familiar with them
If Jeremy Corbyn can’t do that, and it seems to me as a non-Labour Party member that this now the case, what in earth is illogical about calling for someone else to do so, which is what I did?
As I say, I genuinely don’t understand how you came to your conclusions.
When I made my comment I only saw 8 responses so obviously things moved on very quickly and you must feel somewhat besieged (but you can handle that).
For the record I made and deleted 4 comments to your post and re-read your article in the Guardian to be sure about how I felt about it. You have mixed policy with your view about a change in leadership. I still feel that for you to manifestly support the latter is wrong OK? And I have said why.
My view remains that:
1) This is not a good time for their to be disunity in the Labour party. It is indeed akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as it goes down. And it is the country that is the Titanic – not Labour. A concerted effort by Corbyn rejectionists to work with him might have helped.
2) There is a huge risk that someone within the party will rise to power who is even less enthusiastic about your ideas. Sadiq Khan has been a bit of disappointment hasn’t he? There are a lot of Sadiq Khans in the Labour party Richard. Too many in fact.
3) I honestly do not believe that a change in leadership of the Labour party is going to change anything at all in the time that we have. I could of course be wrong and hope to be. But that is what I feel about it.
The whole episode is what I would call ‘football premiership party politics’. We sack the manager – not the recalcitrant players who can’t follow their leader and have undermined his ethos. We ignore the motives of the players and they win. The PLP have won really because Corbyn has been rejected by them. We saw this when they applauded Benn’s Syria speech so robustly and have not roared in kind when Corbyn has tried to take on Cameron.
A party that is obsessed with itself is no better for the country than a party that is obsessed with looking after the 1%. What a choice in the end.
Terrible. My advice remains the same; Keep out of it Richard. Keep out.
I am out of it
I comment, and think
As I always have
But like it or not, those who comment change things
That’s a lesson from physics: even observing makes a difference
And I am not one to turn my back
“You must know something I do not because I can’t get my head around what you have done at all”. This.
This is what I posted on our local Labour website this morning.
“I am quite prepared to believe that there is more to our MP’s dislike of Corbyn than simply a desire to free the Labour Party of Socialism. But I cannot see the current revolt as the action of rational and intelligent people. I see it as a disaster for Labour, a disaster for the people we try to represent, and a disaster for the country.”
I joined Labour last year and voted for Corbyn because he was the only candidate offering a credible alternative to austerity lite. (I wonder where he got those ideas from?) I fear the alternative candidates will be looking through their Overton windows and concluding that the reason Labour is not doing better is that it needs to add racism lite to austerity lite. Obviously it is not good to be overtly racist, but the strategy is to subtly let racists know your party is their least bad option.
I do not agree
The decision is for Labour Party members to make
But it has to be anew leader
It could be John McDonnell
Surely the whole point of the coup is to force Corbyn to resign so the plotters can determine who gets to stand in the election, or more correctly to exclude socialists – so I can’t see how McDonnell will make the cut, Richard.
I would be concerned about playing the plotters’ game in calling for Corbyn to resign.
I do not believe that
John will not (should not) risk his health to take on the leadership, even if ‘they’ would let him through the nomination procedure.
Do writers get paid for articles on ‘Comment is free’?
If they are commissioned, yes
This was not commissioned. I will not be paid
we cannot keep glossing over Jeremy’s failings. He doesn’t do the basics well enough and there seems an air of amateurism around him. We don’t want identikit, bland politicians but Labour must be led by someone with basic competence who can communicate clearly.
Jeremy is great
I hoped he would adapt to leadership as John McD has
I do not think he has
I agree a coalition should be reached in opposition but I agree too with Sodium Haze
http://www.sodiumhaze.org/2016/06/26/its-still-the-iraq-war-stupid/ Corbyn should be allowed to steer Labour through the next few weeks at least as who better to do this while the Chilcot Report is being discussed than someone who reputedly wants to see Blair charged with war crimes?
I really do think this is paranoia
It had not an iota of influence on me
I didn’t mean you in this, I was talking about the Labour Party in general. I didn’t mean for you to assume it was personal 🙂
Extremely shocked by your piece today in The Guardian. After all the hard work you have done to now start to destroy your own base of support is really depressing. Fewer people have faith in Labour precisely because of the centre-right, London-focussed approach represented by nearly all those who left the shadow cabinet today. To criticise Corbyn’s lack of vision is to underestimate the forces — including you now, of all people — who are opposed to anything other than the neo-liberal view expounded by the Jean-Claude Juncker’s of this world. We watched blanket media hatred of Tony Benn in the eighties and here we are again with Guardian Media Group leading the charge. The people who for Scottish Independence, the people who voted Corbyn as leader and the people who voted Brexit all voted for a new, more democratic political landscape. I don’t expect mass media coverage to be anything other than visceral against Brexit or bigoted in praise of it, I just didn’t expect it from Richard Murphy.
Spot one iota of neoliberalism in what I wrote
I was calling for the delivery of all the ideas I have ever talked about
Thank you for responding.
I spot that neo-liberals would end Corbyn’s term as leader and you supported this goal in The Guardian.
I’d love for all your ideas to be delivered, but it’s naïve to expect this through writing an article that only erodes the consensus that you are (were?) and Corbyn is trying to build.
I did no such thing
I argued for exactly the same ideas, nothing more or less
I said that their delivery required a leader who could command the party
To say anything else I absurd
Further to Syd Bolton’s question cum observation above, viz
“What seems ironic to menis how everyone is telling us we have to accept the democratic will of the people albeit marginal when it comes to the referendum, but not, it seems when it comes to the Labour leader and his clear mandate from the membership. Democracy is a process and not a pick and mix”,
along with concerns expressed about a nwo-Blairite coup, taking the Labour Party back to its fixation on markets and neo-liberalism, this article by Jonathan Cook for Common Dreams strike me as a very acute analysis of both the reasons for the differential treatment of the BREXIT and Corbyn mandates, as also of the dangers attaching to the palsied neo – Blairite world view.
In a word, it’s all about class, and liberal contempt for working class values, which is the real reason the recipients of that contempt voted for BREXIT, and will NOT vote for a neo-Blairite offer, which has already failed twice in the last two elections.
Whoever replaces Corbyn must carry on Corbyn’s initiatives, just as Clem Atlee carried on George Lansbury’s.
http://commondreams.org/views/2016/06/27/brexit-and-diseased-liberal-mind
Nothing has changed in my opinions
But I have to believe we can gave a credible opposition
We clearly gave not got that at present
Hear bloody hear !!!!
Hi Richard, i’m not sure i’m all-together convinced by your critique and the timing of it now when all and sundry are doing their level best to depose Jeremy seems a bit strange, but that aside who or what would you propose as the alternative? From what I can see there are no other viable anti-austerity candidates, and much if not all is made of deficiencies in JC’s ‘style’ while policy content is almost never substantively discussed, a bit of a red herring if you asked me and perhaps, and I mean with the greatest respect, that you’ve maybe been sucked in by all this? The members are the sovereign body of the Labour party and Corbyn represents this way over and above any other current potential leadership candidate, because to repeat he has an anti-austerity platform. So if not Corbyn, who??
I would suggest Owen Smith
Ok, thanks for the response, but what informs this choice? A quick look on wikipedia does not reveal much…
I am not sure what you are looking for
Hi again Richard, what I can gather by this ongoing debate here is that your a very good economist making a highly contentious political claim essentially. Your basically making the same central claim that Liz Kendal made in her leadership bid: we have to beat the tories, the identity of the party and who it broadly represents and how we go about doing that are essentially irrelevant and wholly subordinate to the end result of ‘beating the tories’. This I believe all things considered is an overtly lacking and narrow political stratagem and believe this is more in keeping of the general mood of the Labour party membership. People are fed up to the back teeth of ‘tory lite’ new labour neoliberal triangulation politics, many simply cannot afford this business as usual approach, and your response- well ok, if you want to be damned, then you might then get a worse post Brexit right wing government in charge of the country if JC continues on. Two things (i) that’s a hypothesis, (ii) assuming for the sake of argument, your claim might be true but still all-things considered not sufficient. Because, to be clear, there is a real fight for the soul of the Labour party right now and the logic of the two lesser evils is something that people have had foisted on them for years and many are thinking its time to fight because evil is still evil and by constantly aping the right of the years the right has moved evermore and more right – things are not static – and if to not fight this deplorable dynamic of the last 30-40 years now; when?
My desired agenda is very clear
Throughout my life I have learned I sometimes have to compromise
Jeremy Corbyn will never, ever deliver now.mpartly his fault. Partly others
Now you can fight for the soul of Labour or you can try to defeat the far right
You tell me: which is more important?
You can’t do both
Hi Richard. I think that your opinions on political and economic matters are normally pretty accurate, especially in regards to your obvious specialisms. But I think in this case, you’re arguments are wide of the mark.
I don’t know whether your position originates from a sense of world weary frustration with seeing JC isolated and undermined by the repeated machinations of the Blairites and their temporary allies, resulting in an understandable wish for the whole situation to just end, but I emphasise with your feelings. I think we all have hoped on some level that a left-wing charismatic, young, messiah will come out of the wilderness and deliver our people to a left-wing Canaan. But that is, I would argue, a deficiency of our (shared) culture. We’ve all been raised on stories and images of Churchill, JFK, Thatcher, or many other larger-than-life figures of politics who, whatever their real successes, left a mark on history due to the sheer force of the personalities.
The British seem to have a fetish for the ‘great man’ theory of history – the instinct that we need a great leader before we can even figure out how to tie up our own shoe laces. Obviously, we think, the slightly slow wit of the working class wont be able to grasp our progressive ideas unless they’re enchanted by the words of an effective, yet liberal demagogue. Plenty of people on the left keep going on about how the right apparently ‘have their ‘charismatic personalities’ like Johnson and Far-rage so when do we get our clowns?’
I mean, you make a point, early in your essay, about Corbyn’s demeanour. I know you don’t for a second believe that what the man wears is important. He could come into parliament in a track suit and still be competent at his job. It’s telling that this is your first complaint, since this was the first thing the media made a palaver about back in October. Obviously, this image has had the requisite time to sink in. And of course, anyone over a certain age is predisposed to believe that anyone professional and effective wears a shirt and tie as a matter of course. How could they function otherwise?!
But the real import of all this discussion over his appearance is that it highlights our paranoia over ‘perception’ and the control of that perception – the instinct that the essence of a leftist political party is largely irrelevant to success. What matters is how that party is percieved via the lens of the media and the public’s conscious perception (or our fears about that hypothetical public) of that image. In a situation where we on the left have accepted that the press have a largely uncontested dominance over the media, surely we must accept the necessity of appearing to be centrist/centre-right, to repeat the mantras of ‘immigration, immigration’ (printed on mugs and tombstones as well – that always helps), and to have our own media friendly leaders on the TV next to Boris. Only then, when the public is duped into believing we’re ‘British’ and ‘reasonable’ and support a football team and wear a tie to church, will we be able to get into power and get our progressive ideas into government. That’s the theory. And it’s a lousy defeatist theory.
I think you’re right, however, to make an issue of the apparent timidity with which Corbyn and co have embrace progressive economic approaches, especially in public. They’re definitely been a little shy in defending and championing these ideas in public and making them the centre-pieces of their economic plans. They have been too slow in making progress on their initial positions, despite vocal support from you and other ‘heterodox’ economic types.
But I believe these things can change. I think Corbyn can be a great leader, with or without tie and Boris type charisma (god protect us from that!). In their, entirely understandable, bunker mentality, the Corbyn team have been cautious about putting their heads over the top and in the line of fire. We all know how many concealed ‘snipers’ there are, in the liberal media and beyond, to make their cautious a reasonable choice. But the time for caution is over now. If they survive this coup then they will have weathered the firestorm of the worst that the Blairites can marshal in their paralysed distance from the party membership. This will be the time to pin our colours to the mast, embrace the radicalism of their vision and shout their message from the roof-tops. We don’t need the divine descent of Boris’s left-wing mirror image.
No one in Jeremy’s position will ever win an election
If oh want to see the ideas I talk about being delivered the only chance is a change of labour leadership, in my opinion
Of course, if you want a Johnson government carry in as now
FFS he’s only been leader for 9 months since when he has had to start from scratch with purveying socialist policies to the masses, even though the major part of them have been honed by John McDonnell’s team for many years. I’m sick of hearing criticism of his performance in the Referendum debate. The PLP didn’t want him to play a major role at the start and he was quite right not to share platforms with the tories or to lie that the EU was the greatest institution ever created, or to be a part of Project Fear. This was Cameron’s folly and Cameron’s defeat.
I hate to tell you, but it was policy for a long time to do nothing
That was accurately reported
Sorry Richard but your have fallen for the neoliberalite Blairite views of the Labour PLP, and especially I suspect those of a certain tax avoiding Margaret Hodge.
Utter nonsense
Have you even bothered to read what I wrote?
How on earth was it neoliberal?
the problem with FPTP is you need a huge party to win a majority and it will always have internal divisions,
we are watching L&R conflict within the Tories and Labour,
tribalism makes people hang in there,
if Labour remains Blairite it’s doomed, the Chilcott enquiry is just over the horizon and it will eviscerate Blairism,
Labour lost in 2015 because it was so pathetically Tory lite and like a puppy on Camerons lap,
Labour also lost because it was browbeaten into refusing to work with the SNP, it was a spineless move,
The Blairites are obsessed with getting a majority and it will probably never happen again now the SNP has risen,
if the Blairites depose Corbyn the only way to make a coalition happen is if Corbyn rises above his tribalism and crosses the house to sit with Caroline Lucas,
defections to the Greens would reduce Labours chances of a majority more and put them in a position of having to form a coalition to stand any chance,
the Greens are truly socialist, progressive and receptive to post neo-liberal economics,
Caroline Lucas would make an admirable figurhead for a progressive Left coalition,
maybe if the Tories split the wets could coalesce with New Labour and the Nasty Party wing could merge with FUKIP,
that would give you a right, centre and left party to choose from!
You seem to forget that it’s we members and the affiliated unions who will decide what happens. This is our Party (we don’t want to cry but we will).
Precisely
Richard, I don’t doubt your integrity but can’t agree with you here. I can accept that Corbyn may not be able to achieve victory but his treatment, since winning the leadership contest, could make whatever replaces him even more unelectable. I believe he was voted in partly for his message and partly as a protest against the PLP as was. His ability to act as effective opposition has been so handicapped by his own that it has further eroded confidence in politicians.
Unless Labour categorically reject neo-liberalism they have no solutions to offer.
Did I call for neoliberalism?
Richard, I made no indication that you were calling for neo-liberalism, this is a discussion about potential consequences, intended or otherwise. I fully support your economic ideas so we share the same destination it’s the route that is up for debate.
Reading between the lines I get the impression that your issue is more with Corbyns team(his key strategist) than the man himself. His adherence to that team has left him without PLP support, anyone in that position is unelectable and so he must go – I fully understand the ‘we must change to become electable’ argument. But we’ve been down that route before via Blair and look how that turned out. I can only think that you’re holding onto the belief that this time would be different…it’s a belief I struggle to share.
The root of this is probably the same as our differences on the EU, you believe that wholesale systemic change is possible from within, I don’t. I voted Remain as I didn’t want us to be the crash test dummy but I think the EU would have broken up anyway. For me it’s about timescales, change from within is too slow and I think would be repeatedly overtaken by events.
Watching the events unfold around Corbyn and then Brexit I keep getting flashbacks to A Very British Coup.
There is a coup
Of course there is
I don’t deny it
Although I strongly suspect it was not planned as such and I am not a part of it
But the coup is based on three things
First Corbyn did not try
Second that was policy, which I know to be true
Third, it was very bad policy
And that’s a fair basis for a coup
Richard
Fair dos, I’m certainly not claiming to be right here and I lack any inner knowledge. I really hope you’re right on this one but I know that the Labour brand will be damaged now regardless.
The Tory one is too
They lied, massively and that is now very obvious
He’s been leader for just 9 months and in that time he has had many victories in stopping some of the worst policies of a, let’s not forget it, majority tory government. And that despite the continual undermining by the PLP. They were plotting this rout ever since he was elected. I’m sickened by the whole thing.
I agree with you Richard but who could lead such a coalition? You mentioned Caroline Lucas, who speaks passionately and eloquently about what she believes in, but a Green Party leader wouldn’t hack it with the electorate. Sadly it’s too soon for that – even after 40+ years of campaigning.
No matter how ‘sensible’, progressive and intelligent are the views held by a candidate – being the leader of the 2nd major UK party is not the same as being a pressure group activist. You need outstanding leadership and motivational skills plus a certain theatricality (i.e. media friendliness) in order to reach out beyond your core voters. Of course both Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair had it in spades; just a tragedy they were both on the wrong side of history.
I’m not saying that’s the best way to run a country but just that at this moment in time, when there is such a distrust of the establishment and an unprecedented political vacuum facing extraordinary global challenges, there is a need for some charisma in orderto coalesce support around a progressive manifesto.
I don’t know enough about the PLP to identify potential talent except that noneof the old front-bench would meet my criteria. There must be some dynamic young (or not-so-young) blood in the lower ranks (so to speak) who could be plucked out for the job.
The new Tory cabinet will be reinstating all the known suspects plus some less well-known but equally suspect – http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/03/boris-johnson-post-brexit-cabinet-the-possible-lineup. Some of them are pretty smart operators, not to be under-estimated. So at leastt the PLP knows who the enemy is. The challenge is to beat them. It’s war. Coming in a good second is not an option. In this context, of course JC has to go. John McDonnell is more mediafriendly but doesn’t strike me ashaving the fire in his belly that will be required to deal with a predominantly hostile media. Cometh the moment; cometh the man (or woman)? I, along with millions of others, sure hope so. For the sake of the nation.
Owen Smith?
Some say Lisa Nandy but I do not know her
There are others
Yes, Lisa Nandy.
in the Guardian there has been mention of Alan Johnson or Mandleson as possible leadership contenders,
truly creepy thought!
I’d prefer Ed Miliband back compared to most of the suggestions I’ve seen so far
But that’s just silly
I don’t know them but having just checked them out either would appear to be potential candidates. Owen Smith certainly has a lot of experience of Westminster. If Lisa Nandy is a Labour equivalent of Ruth Davidson then she could be suitable. Apparently she’s on the left of the party. Whoever it is has got to have some iron in their soul, don’t you think?
Yes
I thought you were referring to quitters. Owen Smith and Lisa Nandy, both quitters.
Oh come on…
Did you hear what Pwen said in Channel 4 tonight – demanding real left wing policies
Apologiesforinaccuratetyping. Myspacebarisjammed!
I’m reluctantly with Richard on this Jeremy is out scenario – but where is his left wing but supposedly super efficient spin doctor in all this?
He may be the biggest problem
I hear endlessly that Corbyn is not leadership material, will be an electoral disaster etc., often parroted from sources who certainly do not have the success of the Labour Party at heart.
Equally the little people have demonstrated that lately attempts to manage public opinion are inclined to backfire.
I don’t doubt your sincerity Richard – I just think that you are mistaken and I have reason to believe that it’s not my heart leading my head. Fortunate that you are not a member of the Labour Party.
I will have no vote
I am interested in the policy as my article made clear
Twitter is reporting Owen Smith was just on C4 saying we should be making a progressive case against freedom of movement. Not good.
No one will ever be elected again on the basis of freedom of movement
Not as we have had it
Shall we be realistic?
I’m not ready to believe that. It’s not true in Scotland or in Ireland, so why should it be irrevocably true in England?
Because of the way I get comments to moderate I am afraid I cannot follow your logic
So then, according to Merkel (who is likely to be right), we cannot have access to the single market.
Not all migration is controlled by the infle market
I agree that Jeremy is not the man … But:
The current PLP is made up of political apparatchiks of the Blair years, fully paid up Austerians, bought and paid for by t he cooperate lobbyists.
To be elected leader, an individual has to be on the ballot… Except for incumbent leader who is on automatically (which, in my view, is why they are quite so desperate to get him to resign. If he resigns, he is not leader. Therefore not on the ballot.)
Suppose he does resign. The PLP then chooses who to put in the ballot to be next leader. They wont risk anyone else they can’t control or who isn’t approved by Murdoch. Dan Jarvis is most likely. In policy terms, it would be hard to choose between him and Cameron. We have lost the party and genuine left leaning politics is sunk.
So he can’t resign.
If they trigger an election, he will be re-elected.
It may be that then they leave. IF the Tory party also split, that would be fine. Otherwise, as Owen Smith said this evening, the left will be split forever. Unless we can agree a coalition. Which would be wise. We need less tribalism.
I gave called for coalition
But I also think a broad range of candidates would be in any ballot
Idealism combined with pragmatism must be tempered by realism. This is realism.
I respect you Richard for coming out and saying what you said about Jeremy Corbyn. It cannot have been easy given that you both know and like him as a person, and he has been a platform for your ideas. Leadership is not a quality that comes naturally to all, yet it is sorely needed to provide the public with a credible opposition. I too wish Corbyn could have been up to the job, but if he is not, then no shame on him. He was the last person to expect he would win the last leadership contest.
It is now up to the PLP to sort this out in the most bloodless way they can manage.
I found it difficult
But I want the best chance for those policies
I think given where Jetemy is someone else has a better chance of delivering
Dear Richard,
Having had time to reflect on the matter, I have come to the conclusion that it would be wrong for Jeremy Corbyn to step aside now, because it would be both unfair and undemocratic.
In the first place, people were saying he was unelectable from day one. I seem to remember that you were among the voices pointing out that the only test of that is the ballot box, and as far as I can tell, that is the case still.
In the second place, I don’t understand why Labour is indulging in a leadership challenge right now. It is project Fear all over again. Fear that their leader will not do any better in the next general election than he did in the referendum. But if they keep going the way they are now, then their demise is all but guaranteed.
In the third place, I don’t understand why so much is being made of the referendum result. This was not Corbyn’s referendum. It was Cameron who promised a referendum and lost it. And if it is true, as you said earlier, that no Prime Minister will be able to use Royal Prerogative to invoke article 50, then the debate is not yet over. Labour can still fight to remain in the EU, and win. The whole referendum debate has been a shambles, and clouded over by Tory infighting. No wonder that Corbyn’s sound debate and statesmanship have not caught the public’s attention. Democracy is not as simple as casting a vote, although that is part of it.
In the fourth place, Cameron wants Corbyn to go. Now why oh why would he say that if Corbyn remaining in leadership was a gift to the right? Cameron lost, and he can’t bear to watch his opponent stay in the same position. Is Corbyn in Cameron’s pocket, that he should pay the price for our PM’s failure?
In the fifth place, you mention Jeremy’s lack of leadership abilities, and that his team has a policy of doing nothing. I suggest that doing too much is exactly how the Tories got into the mess they are now. They are passionate in their desire to make a difference, but as clueless as a bunch of headless chickens in making it come about. Sometimes, doing nothing is the most pragmatic thing one can do. Otherwise one will be forever chasing one’s tail. It also gives genuinely good ideas the chance to arise and be considered.
In the sixth place, you mention Jeremy’s lack of vision. Vision is difficult to define, but I do not think it is an essential quality of leadership. There may be people with vision who are not leaders. A good leader would give those people the opportunity to bring their vision about, without imposing on them stale ideas of his own.
In the seventh place, you mention the threat of the rise of the far right. Fascism is dangerous because it stirs up people’s passions and moves some to violence. But we cannot fight fire with fire. When Nigel Farage made his remarks to the EU that none of them had ever had a proper job, he got exactly the reaction he desired. Restrictions to free movement of capital and free movement of people may be on the table, but I think we should look at restrictions to freedom of speech as well. It is called civility. Whoever is the leader of the Labour Party does not make much difference, as long as they are united against hatred and evil.
In the eighth place, I respect your entitlement to have an honest opinion. I also have mine. But I will not have any say in Labour’s leadership contest, so all I can say is that whoever they choose as their leader, they have to be united behind him or her if they are to have a chance at the next general election. And if Corbyn stays on, then we have to hope that he will succeed in winning it. I believe he can, as long as his party does not tear itself to pieces first.
Best wishes,
David
David
I admit I found much of that quite bizarre because none of oit explains how on earth he can woin without a parliamentary party, let alone form an opposition which is his job
Your logic is based on wishful thinking
I admit I have never worked on that basis, including when seeking to deliver real change, which I think my job to be
But let’s differ
Richard
Not wishful thinking, I was trying to understand on what basis he should stand aside given that he still enjoys a popular base of support.
If the MP’s don’t unite behind their leader, you can either blame the MP’s for failing to unite or the leader for failing to lead. The way you put it, it is quite clearly a failure of leadership, and I am happy to say I have changed my mind on the matter.
Thank you Richard.
Thanks
Dear Richard,
I am still thinking about this, and hope you don’t mind if I share some more reflections.
I have not met Jeremy, so have no idea whether the criticisms of his leadership are justified. I suspect they are, based on third hand evidence of what you say you have heard from others. But I keep an open mind on whether he will manage to assert his authority now and bring his MP’s to heel without breaking up the party. Were I to indulge in some wishful thinking, then I would hope he might succeed. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Only Jeremy can prove himself now, and the coming days will tell what will come.
In this vein, I repeat my respect for you coming out and saying what you did about Jeremy. It is in fact the kindest thing you could have done, by helping him face the reality of the challenges of leadership. If he is to succeed, then he must rise up to his critics and defeat them. If not, then it is only right that he step aside and let another take the wheel. He may be genuine and sincere, but of course you want your ideas to have the best possible chance of realisation.
To publicly offer such a selfless verdict fills me with admiration. It is a mark of true friendship. What a contrast to the back-stabbing, in-fighting Tory party. Chop one head off the shape shifting monster, and another grows in its place.
Best wishes,
David
I read your Guardian piece Richard and thought it carefully identified Jeremy Corbyns strengths and weaknesses, in as non judgemental way as possible. It pretty much reflected the conversation I’d had this afternoon with an old friend with impeccably left- wing credentials. Someone who has made a real difference to people’s lives in a poor part of London. Based on what we’ve seen, he seems unable to reach out across his own party, let alone to the voters he’d need to reach to get elected. This is not just about wearing smart suits or some kind of macho leadership, but it is about making a serious attempt to look the part and assemble a convincing and effective team.
And I do get fed up with lazy stereotypes that recurr in these discussions – Blairites, Corbynites – and the associated ya-boo name calling. I’d be as happy as anyone to see Blair in front of a court, but can we please move on and talk about the future and not the past? That means the challenges we face now and looking forward with fresh thinking and policies to tackle them. Reaching out to other groups and parties has been the most refreshing line of discussion on these blogs. Instead of endless internal wrangling about past battles and bogeymen
And a word of support for MPs – they have to represent and get elected by real voters, not all of whom will agree with them on every minutiae of policy. That is not something that members have to consider – it’s all too easy for them to live in their own echo chambers which may be even more limited than the Westminster bubble that MPs are accused of living in. So I’d be inclined to listen very carefully to what MPs have to say on what – and who – will get a left of centre government elected to chuck out the current disastrous and divisive bunch.
I am slowly coming over to your way of thinking. Wasn’t remotely impressed by Owen Smith on C4 this evening – he’s probably competent enough, but against Boris, he’d be mincemeat
The only two who could effectively compete with Boris as show-men are Dan Jarvis and Chukka Umunna. Both would take us back to Tory Lite.
Added to that – most of the MPs currently revolting are in seats where “Leave” won by large margins. They are looking at an electorate that has moved over to UKIP. My big fear is that they try to turn themselves into UKIP-Lite to draw them back when what we need – and could be – is a party that speaks to and for the Remain voters who desperately want a party that celebrates multiculturalism, sustainability and equity. There is nobody to speak for us beyond the Greens.
A coalition would be ideal, but my experience within the party when we tried (still trying) to create some kind of anti-Tory coalition at local level to fight the council elections next year was… difficult. Party structure and party structuralists are not keen. Those of us who joined with Corbyn don’t care about that kind of thing.
Which is pretty much what Richard is saying – thank you – but I”m not sure the Labour Party can be that. The MPs need to be disposed of. They’ll almost certainly lose their seats at the next election (see swing to UKIP above) but that’s too late – and the coalition in power will be Tory/UKIP with Nigel Farage in government which is genuinely terrifying.
That is genuinely terrifying
I am not excited by Umuma etc
But what is worse?
I’d just like to say that I think Richard has done (as usual) an incredible job on this blog of presenting and commenting on views quite antithetical to his own and done it with great openness and integrity. This blog has lengthened quickly and included critical comments from dismayed regulars like myself and I’m aware , that despite heavy work commitments and family he has responded to us all well into what I suspect is his bedtime (I remember you saying you were a Lark not an Owl).
In a spirit of reconciliation I’d like to thank Richard for this generosity and that, despite the heightened emotion at this time we can all remember what connects us and that Richard brings us together on HIS blog so that we also have a voice we might not otherwise have.
I’ve never known a blog to expand in size so rapidly which necessitates a lot of time and patience to moderate. Sometimes we posters can forget this, especially in cases where volatility of view is present.
Thank you
Can we carry on in that spirit?
I only just got to this: the comments are overwhelming right now
Simon, very, very well said, sir.
And can I very strongly second that. We all have to help Richard maintain the civility of debate that marks this blog out from most others
Well said Simon. Can I just say I feel sure that none of us want a slick, swaggering, arrogant individual to lead the Labour Party. Mr Corbyn has played an enormous part in awakening interest in another way, we all have a view about how to lead, teamwork being part of it. It has been a bad couple of weeks. I think everyone on this blog has behaved impeccably through their disagreements. I value old fashioned manners highly. The real tragedy in all this is Jo Cox. Bless her dear ones. Keep strong Mr Murphy.
I will
A thought.
Turnout at the referendum was 72%. Turnout at average GE is around half that, less for some council elections. So at least half of these people have never voted before – at least, not all at the same time in the same election.
It is therefore an arithmetic impossibility that they were all ‘Labour voters’ even if they were in areas with Labour MPs and Labour councils.
But they have got the taste of politics and they like winning and they are now in the UKIP camp –
So Labour could suffer the same kind of catastrophe at the next election in England/Wales as they did in Scotland next year>
This won’t be the fault of the incumbent leader, whoever that is.
Labour really can’t become UKIP-Lite. It’s not credible and not only will it fail, it will drive away pretty much the entire membership – and if nothing else, we’re pretty fired up right now: witness the crowd in Parliament Square in support of Corbyn. I don’t know of any other party leader who has ever drawn that kind of a crowd. Blair got a million out onto the streets, but only by declaring an illegal war on a sovereign nation.
So – If Labour is going down to UKIP in the north. What can we do to rescue other areas of the country? If anything?
GE turnout is usually well into 60% range
30% is council elections
Boris had a piece in the Torygraph today where he seems to have lied his head off, which doesn’t seem at all unusual for him. I’m hearing that staunch Tories aren’t happy about his transparent dishonesty. Neither are the EU, their angry responses to his latest flights of fantasy can be read here http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/brussels-rejects-boris-johnson-pipe-dream-over-single-market-access and there’s a link to Boris’s original piece in there too. Are we really worried that there’ll be a right-wing government led by this clown? he’s a laughing stock now. Is there any real hope he’ll get elected? If he did, what’s he going to do? What’s anyone in the Tory party going to do now if they get elected as leader? They don’t have a proper leader now, just someone there to placehold and they don’t have any policies except keep lying – where’s that going to get them? They seem to be a spent force to me. Where can they go now except into further disarray?
Many have lied their way to power
Owen Jones agrees with you – you probably knew that…
https://medium.com/@OwenJones84/my-thoughts-on-the-plight-of-labour-38413229f88#.ce8ursyco
And I note he says he’s agonised and been sleepless too
An excellent piece from Owen Jones. And when people start calling him a Blairite, neo-liberal one has to wonder whether they know what on earth those labels mean. He’ll be called a splitter next (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY)
At the risk of throwing myself open to ridicule, can we just forget Blair for a minute (or preferably forever) and reflect on the long period of (New) Labour government. Long because it succeeded in persuading a majority of the UK voters to keep it in power and marginalised the Tories. What did it achieve that was really worthwhile – getting the NHS back on its feet? Supporting progressive welfare policies? Engaging with Europe? An extended period of relative economic stability? All policies that the Tories have set about reversing and that gained wide support across the spectrum support. And then what did it do that was regressive and destructive – PFI? A complacent attitude to the finance sector? Failure to tackle tax avoidance? Iraq is obvious but should not obscure the good stuff that was achieved.
Then keep and retain what worked well, and come up with policies to tackle both the failings and the new challenges we face. Otherwise this risks being just like that dreadful period of the 80’s when Labour really were unelectable. Michael Foot was a fine and decent man, and a wonderful speaker. But he too was never going to be voted in as leader by the British people as a whole. Let alone whilst his party were in engaged in internal squabbles that were of little interest outside of party committee rooms
Robin
Thanks for being a voice of sanity
Policy can win this
With the right leadership of parties committed to them
Richard
My own view on this is that this is not about Corbyn. This is about the rejection of socialism.
No Labour leader will be accepted who wants a courageous state.
The PLP are neoliberal to the core, – this battle is about ideology, not Corbyn.
Miliband was having similar difficulties, as the late Michael Meacher noted when he asked “Why has Ed moved his cabinet to the right?” We can now see that it was pressure.
A new leader will have to be “one of us.” Which means no change.
The memb rship delivered JC
Now they could choose again, but someone who can deliver
I did not vote for Corbyn for his leadership potential, but for the program he espoused.
I can see little prospect of a candidate emerging who would offer a similar program who could command the support of many of the PLP members who have opposed it from the start.
In fact it is difficult to see a credible candidate at all.
I have to disagree
John McDonnell is one
Owen Smith another
What I’ve seen of Owen Smith doesn’t impress hugely. Is there something he has that would stand effectively against Boris while also raising the kind of passion that brought thousands into Parliament Square last night?
Corbyn needs a new team. That’s a given. But he has a kind of authenticity that few can match. I’d love McDonnell but if the New Statesman is right in anything (and that’s a huge coda), he’s even more hated by the PLP than Corbyn.
I really don’t think a new team will change much now
I’m disappointed Richard. I understand the argument that because Corbyn hasn’t got the support of the PLP, it is impossible, in a very practical sense, for him to be an effective leader. I understand the criticism that he hasn’t handled the media well. I understand the frustration at the lack of clear policies coming from the shadow cabinet. But, but, but….what is the alternative?
This is what you ask for:
“What I would stress though is that there is no point in a change if Labour is not going to learn its lessons. Labour has to be an opposition. It must have a substantially different approach to the Conservatives. It must embrace the counter-cyclical investment that is so desperately needed at present in housing, business, sustainable energy and (perhaps most of all) people, who should have a right to debt-free education. In the process it would put finance and big business in its proper place, where it is treated as very significant, but not the real power in the land.”
I don’t see anyone amongst his parliamentary critics who would deliver that, and I don’t accept that Keir Starmer or Dan Jarvis would fit the bill.
If I had to choose a replacement, Diane Abbott would work for me. But we know what the media and the party would do to her too.
This really is a political issue – the right are trying to eliminate the left from the party, and I can’t go along with that. It’s not abut Jeremy, it’s about his ideas (and mine).
If purity of line is more important than protecting real people you are right
But it isn’t
That’s the fact
I have reluctantly come to the same conclusion as Richard. I got some flack yesterday about reporting a comment I’d heard from a Labour party member “He looks like a shabby old man whom you would give a fiver to on the street” but said yesterday that I still supported him. There is a faint echo of this in Richard’s Guardian article. Whether what I wrote yesterday had any influence I doubt.
When I was young I was very idealistic. When I rose to senior management I found that implementation was much harder than I thought. As Bismark said “Politics is the art of the possible.”
I have worked in many institutions in my life and have had a variety of leaders; some excellent – some appalling. Bob Cryan the head of department when I first came to Northumbria was the best. Some commented “he could walk over you with slippers.” He had an ability to listen; formulate plans, be clear, have a vision and could sweep you along. After a meeting you would feel a few inches taller. He was 1st generation Irish from Huddersfield and I remember a memorable St Patricks day when we retired to the pub for the afternoon! It came as no surprise that he did well. His son was impressed for the first time when he answered the phone when Patrick Steward (of Startrek and X-men fame) offered him the VC position at Huddersfield (always wanted to go back to his home town). He wad definitely someone for whom you would walk the extra mile.
I have had other appalling leaders; don’t listen, unclear vision – total inability to inspire or motivate. After meeting them I would feel demoralised and ignored. If I saw them coming I would cross the street and hope they didn’t see me.
At the end of the day Leadership is about getting people to follow you. For me empowerment, vision, ability to listen and compromise are important. Other strategies may work. I had a leader who used bullying and force as his main tactic. “He has the warmth of a dead dog” one of my colleagues remarked. A Russian colleague said “don’t underestimate him these tactics worked very well for Stalin”.
Going back to Corbyn. I’m not sure what he stands for; he seemed to have clear vision nine months ago but there has been no evolution or exposition. He has not made the transition from an idealist to someone who can lead an inspire people. A true leader would have every labour MP of the left hanging by the phone; hoping for a place every time there is a cabinet reshuffle (which would happen only rarely). I don’t buy the Blarite argument. I believe most MPs genuinely want to help there constituents and could be inspired by new economic ideas such as Richard’s. It should be an easy message to sell both to the MPs and general public. He is failing.
My hope is the policies might survive
They have to
Hear hear.
On that score, and I know this is not quite logical, but the leadership issue is totemic. If the mass of the party can be batted this way and that by hostile elements, progressive policies will have no chance of survival regardless of the personality of the new broom.
This depends on how you define progressive politics
I have no love of anything looking like neoliberalism but now we face the path to what looks like fascism
Which do you want?