This is from Lilian Greenwood.
You may not have heard of her.
She was Shadow Transport Secretary.
And it says why she resigned from the Shadow Cabinet.
I have heard something similar time and again.
I witnessed some of this confusion.
The message is simple: if you can't run the proverbial in a brewery you can't lead a political party.
And if the people who need there to be a compassionate government in the UK are going to get what they require then there has to be someone who can not only organise such an event, but very much more as well.
So please do read it.
And then realise why I have had to say what I wrote here.
I didn't do it for fun. Or to get traffic. Or for attention. Or anything but the desire for a government that can deliver the ideas I have campaigned for. Or something close to them, as I'm a pragmatist who has to always live in hope.
So go on, please read it.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Worth pointing out that Andy Burnham is still in the Shadow Cabinet. I would have had more time for the likes of Lilian Greenwood if they had remained in post while Angela Eagle triggered a leadership contest as provided by the Labour Party rules. Instead she and others resigned and took part in a coup. Of course an orchestrated hourly resignations followed by a “vote of no confidence” designed to change the leadership in breach of the rules of the Labour Party is a COUP.
I do not agree
Lilian Greenwood says quite specifically she was part of no such thing
So do others
I am not saying some did not plot: of course they did
But a coup? No, I don’t think so
coupincidence theory?
Very interesting read, very much her personal view of Corbyn, Is HS2 really necessary? I’m afraid I don’t believe it is.
Now go and really read it
You clearly did not
You read an absurd microcosm of it
I’ve read it. I’m gobsmacked if you think it means subscribing to undermining Corbyn on behalf of Labour pro-establishment neoliberals, who don’t build houses or regulate the banks or stop tax injustice excess or fund students, and jump into war.
You think I believe in all those things?
Get real
Kindly explain because I thought I read your books and you wanted massive investment to increase provisions and stimulus with tax tools as prominent route and proper regulated finance and fair tax.
I did
I do
I always will
And there is now not a hope Jeremy will deliver that
So I hope someone else can
Why else do you think I have suggested a change?
I have not changed my mind on any other issue
Of course, there was a failed coup, Richard. The procedure for changing the leadership of the Labour Party is to collect the requisite nominations and trigger a leadership challenge; not embark on a well-trailed and highly-orchestrated hourly resignations followed by a “vote of no confidence” designed to force the leader out. That is a coup. Andy Burnham (no great fan of Corbyn) said so and refused to resign. I would have had more time for what Lilian Greenwood has to say if she had taken the same course. I voted for Andy Burnham as my second the last time but I’ll vote for him ahead of any of the former shadow cabinet members that resigned as part of this failed coup, whatever their position on other issues.
Thank you
I regret I do not have time respond to your comment although I’d like to
There have been too many to make that possible
My posting of it does not mean I agree with it
She resigned from the Shadow Cabinet she had served in for nine months. She could have remained in post for another two months while a legitimate leadership contest is conducted. She presumably also took part in the “vote of no confidence”. As a member I consider both acts as participation in a coup.
You might
But there would have been no leadership context if she had not done so
You ignore that obvious fact
And the fact that her job was impossible because Corbyn made it so
What fact? How come there’s a leadership contest while Andy Burham (who just responded for Labour on the Nice attack) has not resigned?
Tom
You are getting boring
I delete anyone who posts too often in a day
Richard
“Lilian Greenwood says quite specifically she was part of no such thing”
Mandy Rice-Davies anyone?
You’re becomimg very boring
Bit harsh for a gentle snipe Richard.
I shall keep my apercus to myself in future.
Mind you being called boring by an accountant must be some sort of a result?
I did not identify a gentle snipe
Er, the title should be:
“For those who think there was a coup and that Lilian Greenwood was at the heart of it, I suggest reading this”
You acknowledge plotters. What do plotters do? Well, they plot. What did they plot, a trip to the seaside?
What are you talking about?
If you want to see how gerrymandering is done Richard, then look up Brave New Films and how the Koch brothers rig elections. What I’ve read from The Canary smacks of gerrymandering Koch brothers style. Disenfranchising those in debt from their rightful votes. I can’t take articles like Lillian’s seriously, until you take the “unprecedented” amount of retractions made by MSM seriously, and what seems like a co-ordinated plot to remove Corbyn. Not to dissimilar to the possible fraud we see in the #ToryElectionExpenses scandal. 30 Police forces are taking this seriously, and so is the Election Commission. I think you should too.
Of course there were plots
This is politics
But it was not 172 MPs
Or anything like it
And if JC could not handle a plot he can’t be leader
Ability to do so is one of the criteria for being leader
“This is politics” ..and if JC can not handle a plot he can’t be leader” So it’s a co-ordinated plot Richard, using digital PR companies and MSM only affordable to the rich ? ……with Labour “Soft Left” used as cover ? How democratic.
You know I expect leaders of the opposition to be politically big enough to deal with realities of modern polotivs
Like plots
And PR
In addition to being able to direct their parties
And if they can’t? They really can’t be leader
It’s not hard to work out
I think you have to be invcredibly naive to believe there was no attempted coup. Angela4Leader website registered on June 25. The same evening, big splash in the papers that Hilary Benn was to resign. Next day, every hour on the hour there was a Shadow Cabinet resignation. Then we had the NEC minority attempt to keep incumbent leader off the ballot.
Lack of clarity on HS2 a resigning issue? do me a favour. How many Shad Cab people resigned when Harman led Labour to abstain on the welfare bill last year? Not one.
I am not saying some did not plot
I am saying most did not
Because I do not think they did
I have no idea whether Angela Eagle did
Owen Smith has clearly says he did not
“I was approached six months ago to back Owen Smith to be Labour leader. I politely declined the offer.
John Mann (@JohnMannMP) 13 July 2016”.
By?
Transport, so very important, I applaud Lilian Greenwood, I know with my eldest that he pays a great deal to get to work.
Public transport should be heavily subsidised, to enable people to get to work of course.
Utilities, health, education, all publicly funded.
Enough left over for the private sector to make profits, give them their fair whack.
The Tories are going to steal Labours thunder, if they have not already.
Have to address concerns about communities and immigration, which is legitimate.
Mr Corbyn does not have the sole custody of socialism, whatever that means now.
Repeal the crown estate gift Osborne gave to the royals, back to the civil list if we must.
All shades of views on your blog Mr Murphy, can there be consensus amongst such diversity, it will take some time.
I think this is strong stuff from Greenwood, whose sincerity I do not doubt. I’ve seen comments from other shadow ministers and MP’s that chime with what she is saying.
There is surely no dispute that Corbyn has shown himself incapable of managing the PLP and that this led to many MP’s resigning, or voting against him in a no confidence vote.
I accept that there have been plotters against him from the outset, but his appalling and frankly negligent leadership have made it possible for a trickle to become a torrent of dissatisfaction.
It does boil down to competence and I’m afraid Jeremy is lacking in this pretty vital component for a major party leader.
Thanks for posting. While I can’t help thinking 30 or 40 resignations were part of a coup, other 100+ were down to pent up frustration exacerbated by the very recent Brexit result with the coup being a trigger.
I still hold out some hope for Jeremy, but any leadership campaign needs to acknowledge his mistakes so far and outline how he will avoid making them in future.
You may have the ratio right
I’d have thought 30 at most
Yeah right, so JC is responsible for Brexit? Pfff!
Can I just say without being patronising that my favours test people on tele and radio are
The fabulous Maggie Arderin Pocock and the equally fabulous Jim Al Khalili.
The life scientific with mr Khalili is the best of radio and astronomy with the woman who when a schoolgirl built her own telescope.
Race, colour really does not matter, it is the giving and passing on of something inspiring and wonderful that does.
I also loved the deliciously irreverent and wicked Joan Rivers. Peace to all
There was never acceptance of Corbyn as leader because of his politics, not his competence. We’ve had some incredibly daft leaders.
Remember the panic during the last Labour leadership election? Anyone with your/Corbyn’s politics will face the same difficulties as leader. Blanket misrepresentation in the media and persistent undermining by a section of the PLP.
I think Corbyn will leave the option open for a wiser and better leader much more left wing than before who will not need to talk austeroty because the Tories have abandoned it
Some people need to grow up. The evidence of incompetence on the part of Corbyn and his team is becoming overwhelming. The PLP had a duty to act and we should thank them for doing so. The alternative was another four years of this, followed by five more of Tory government.
Richard didn’t have to speak up, but we should thank him too.
Or I suppose Richard is part of a giant neo-liberal conspiracy involving 180 Labour MPs, Danny Blanchflower and the lizards.
Some seem to think the latter is true
And I do plot with Danny, it has to be said, but only over where to meet up and put the world of economics to right
Corbyn has big union backing, big membership support and enigmatic popularity – so if you, the PLP or anyone else concerned wants a different leader they had better come to terms with that fact and start learning to how to bargain and to reach an accord with JC & his numerous supporters because you can’t succeed without them.
How could that not be completely obvious?
Either that or you can run around with with furrowed brow, wagging your middle finger telling them they “need to grow up”. See how that approach goes. It hasn’t done a lot of good thus far
Wrong
They have to face the fact that 172 MPs are not going to work with him
What is he going to lead?
On a seperate, but perhaps more important subject, I found Caroline Lucas’s article on Trident today worthy of consideration from both a political and economic decision making perspective.
I’m struggling with all the arguments being put forward to maintain four nuclear subs which if we ever were put in the position to need to use them would most probably mean the end of life for a large percentage of the world’s population. They are neither a deterrent nor a force ever to be used, a total irrelevance in the global stockpile of nuclear weapons that someone sometime has got to take a unilateral position to start the essential existential change of mindset that is required.
To the point that any politician who can find themselves arguing in favour its renewal, I would have to put on my watch list of potentially insane sociopaths and psychopaths. Which probably means most of the Tories, many of the Labour party and a few others.
It strikes me as odd (OK I know it’s a deliberate ploy) that the timing of this monumental decision has been brought forward to just before parliament goes into recess and in the middle of utter chaos in both main parties. With hardly a CND demonstrator in sight (or not getting any press anyway)
And it takes the Greens yet again to point out the utter madness of our political class. Mediaeval thinking with 21st century weaponry – a very dangerous combination for any right minded person to accept.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/a-recent-report-showed-13-times-nuclear-weapons-were-almost-launched-accidentally-its-time-to-scrap-a7141296.html
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/trident-renewal.html
From today’s debate:
The SNP’s George Kerevan asks if she (May) is prepared to authorise a nuclear strike that would kill 100,000 people.
“Can we cut to the chase? Is she personally prepared to authorise a nuclear strike that can kill a hundred thousand innocent men, women and children?”
“Yes”, says May firmly.
“Unlike some suggestions that we could have a nuclear deterrent but not actually be wiling to use it, which come from the Labour Party frontbench.”
What she did not admit is that each nuclear warhead has the capability to kill at least a million people (innocent men, women and children – not army combatants) and each submarine carries between 8-16 missiles and we have 4 subs although not all in service at the same time. So the PM of the day has the capability to kill up to 16 million innocent people per submarine, lets say 3 could be put to sea quickly so 48 million innocent deaths at the press of a button.
Stark raving bonkers existential sociopathic/psychopathic tendency in the extreme, clearly demonstrated today by a woman who we currently entrust the ultimate control over such weaponry.
Not to mention the UK holds only about 1% of the worlds nuclear weapons. It is estimated that nine countries in the world possess a total of 15,375 nuclear weapons. The United States and Russia account for 93 percent of them.
And we are about to spend an estimated £200 billion+ to purchase and maintain four more subs for another 30 years. Utter madness beyond belief!
Is Corbyn the only sane member of the Houses of Parliament?
No
Clearly not, as your own list proves
But note Labour conference voted for this policy last year after electing Corbyn leader
I am not in favour of Trident
The account that I have read seems to point to a lack of architecture in the party in terms of internal policy generation matched to external communication.
Maybe because of the resignations a lot of capable people fell by the wayside as collateral damage?
I still see this as ‘six of one and half a dozen of the other’ to be honest Richard although I appreciate your efforts to illuminate your now famous previous blogs on the fate of Corbyn with more factual evidence which amplifies your original thoughts..
So – if we accept that Labour for now is a lost cause – who is to fill the opposition vacuum?
This could be a defining moment for the Greens, Plaid Cymru? Have we seen them step up to the plate yet? Are there signs of life? Will the media give them any attention? And what of the Lid Dems – has their time come again?
This is not just about Labour – it is also about the other parties in her majesty’s opposition. What are they doing? What is it telling us about the nature of oppositional politics in this country? As you say – where is the political vision?
Good questions
But remember Labour is the opposition for the next four years
Many seem to have forgotten this fact
Including Jeremy Corbyn who cannot fill the ranks of shadow ministers
There are 44 vacancies right now not counting those doubled up
Richard – the harsh fact for me at least is that Labour is going into tail spin which will end with just one outcome.
So, I ask again – rhetorically of course – not of you (you have enough on) – where is the rest of the supposed opposition?
Maybe this is meant to happen? Something has to be destroyed in order for there to be an improvement, something new, a new hope.
A negative view of it is that neo-liberalism has succeeded in bringing down a truly progressive party or movement.
Yet at the same time neo-liberal orthodoxy has also nearly destroyed capitalism (2008) and revealed the sham of self correcting markets and non-regulation. It has also shown (when one considers the conduct of Cameron & Osbourne’s government and the BREXIT charade) that those of a neo-liberal persuasion are not fit to govern because essentially they do not believe in governance at all. They are nothing but high class establishment anarchists.
Hopefully when the split with Labour happens, there will be realignments and new alliances forged and therefore a better opposition of sorts.
Neo-liberalism may need drawing from Labour like poison from a wound. Many people I speak to want clearer blue water between the main parties.
I’m afraid it is going to be a long haul.
You’ve read my versions
Richard & Steve H – both spot on. Being popular with your supporters does not define leadership. It means you’re popular. On the other hand, successful leaders need to be popular, otherwise they’d have nobody to lead. Shades here of Hempel’s paradox.
It was always my opinion, which counts for nothing as I’m not a member of the Labour Party, that he should never have accepted the leadership in the first instance. He must have known it would eventually end in tears; he’s been around Westminster longer than most. As you have repeatedly stated, Richard, not being leadership material does not reflect negatively on one’s integrity, intelligence, compassion, creativity, experience etc. etc. It simply means you’re not a ‘leader’.
I don’t know what more can be said, except that among the 230 Labour Party MPs there surely must be at least one who has the qualities necessary to inspire and lead the others. I appreciate there’s a formal election procedure but they don’t even seem to be able to agree on that.
While all this malarkey is going on in the public arena, the Tories clean up the scene of the crime and get on with business as usual leaving the rest of the country (i.e. approx. 2/3rds) in a state of total bewilderment, awaiting a puff of white smoke – from Kings Manor or is it Victoria Street? – so that Parliament can get on with addressing the ever growing list of socio-economic problems that beset the country.
It’s exhausting trying to keep track, so big thanks to you all for the regular up dates. Final word – what are your views on Lisa Nandy and/or Clive Lewis? Just curious (https://theconversation.com/two-strong-potential-labour-leaders-who-might-not-be-on-your-radar-62568).
Erratum. I meant 1/3rd not 2/3rd – actually 29% – being those who didn’t vote for either of the main parties. In reality it’s probably around 50% of the country that’s not actively engaged. Statistics not my forte!
Richard
I follow what you write with a deep interest and I have read the disturbing piece by Lilian Greenwood. It is very worrying that you have serious doubts about Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. Nevertheless, after weighing up the pros and cons I believe he deserves our full support until he is ready and willing to hand over the reins, because his politics and policies have shattered the Westminster bubble. No other current Labour politician would resonate with members in the same way.
Some MPs have been plotting to remove Jeremy since the first day he was elected. These MPs include several who were parachuted into office without the true support of their CLPs.
These people were very well aware that the labour party rules mean that the incumbent leader would be a candidate on any new ballot. So they did their utmost to make him resign as leader and ensure that he would need 50 PLP nominations.
They have used laughable allegations of anti-semitism and homophobia supported by a compliant right wing press. And they are now using allegations of abuse, threats, and intimidation as a reason to shut down democracy within the Labour Party. Throughout, I have seen no evidence of serious threats or intimidation coming from Jeremy’s supporters even though there have been risible attempts to portray people such as Owen Jones as bullies for texting acquaintances in meetings.
It is essential that Jeremy remains.
Best regards and best wishes
david
So you want failure, incompetence and a Tory government?
Why?
Your signature conciseness could be mistaken for conjecture in that instance.
Objecting to Corbyn and/or his supporters is not enough. Given their influence and numbers, the detractors are going to have to win them over. Hostile indignation isn’t going to do that.
What might help is a show of good will and an olive branch proposal that includes a clear, alternative plan that they might approve of.
Either that, something like that or you can try running a Labour party with an antagonised base and membership. I find that quite difficult to imagine.
Let’s try offering them someone who could deliver Corbynomics
There you are: it wasn’t hard
Richard.
What bothers me is that there is no evidence in the public domain that demonstrates that Jeremy is not a team player. It is all tittle tattle from malcontents. If we are asked to ditch a leader on the basis of poor performance then the standard of evidence has to be such that we can exercise judgment. Private conversations, or perceptions do not cut the mustard. It is very easy to manufacture a false narrative. Caste your mind back to how Terry Waite the Archbishop of Canterbury’s special envoy was unknowingly setup as a CIA stooge. All with press and MSM fanfare.
The real narrative is the crises in Capitalism and what should replace it. The current struggle in the Labour Party reflects this, as it does all over Europe and the USA. JC & JMC like the Occupy Movement have mass party grass roots support. In this scenario like the aristocracy of old the PLP are just bit players.
The people of this country across all classes are very angry. In many the issues are keenly felt but remain dimly understood. Brexit demonstrated that.
I cannot foretell the future, but if JC and team come up with the alternative to our present economic system, labour will win another landslide. That’s where the courageous citizen steps up to the plate to prove that such an alternative does exist.
They couldn’t even agree to oppose Osborne on the fiscal charter when they started so what hope of an alternative economic system?
Sorry, but what evidence have you that anyone in the JC team has a clue what that means? Let’s start with your evidence: I’ve given mine
While everyone is busy considering who would be best for labour, you may like to consider who would be best for voters.
And; with a grossly biased press and media no labour government is likely to be elected any decade soon. AND that ignores the boundary changes soon to appear.
Of course, the other minor electoral problems that the conservatives have will find a ready resting place under a carpet corner somewhere..
Names good or bad have little import, what does are the basics as according to contract/or-the-rule-of-law. That’s all, to compare the year long speeches made of outright lies by Obama, was more than enough for his most personal friends/backers and every voter soon after his first election. To all of their dismay..ever since..
Same results will probably come, as the realized set of lies from the (now) lips of May or any one in position of authority (be they heads of the EU or NATO–one and liars who have never experienced consequences at their income or position levels)…
Sad but true, we have been sold a ‘brand’ worth the air, only found if the shills are the ultimate winners….Otherwise, the emptiness will mirror our worthless bank accounts, right after, future bank bailouts—
Or the never-ending lawsuits knowingly expected to be brought by any or all, corporations, foreign and domestic….under ISDS (investor-state dispute settlement) clauses…inserted in every trade deal…negotiated….to date…
Seems more than stupid at this point to be repeatedly naive—ya think?.
See bilaterals.org for all details and content analysis done on all global trade agreements—-from NATO, CETA, TPP, TTIP, FIPA, and the worst of the worst TISA.