Crosswords0 min ago
A Failure Review
43 Answers
https:/
It seems a bit odd to me that Labour are having a post mortem when they already know the answer - listen to the electorate, they've told you and in some areas, quite emphatically.
It seems a bit odd to me that Labour are having a post mortem when they already know the answer - listen to the electorate, they've told you and in some areas, quite emphatically.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by albaqwerty. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Labour had too many weak points.
1) Corbyns association with terrorism.
2) very weak leadership, unable to deal with problems quickly and decisively. (Antisemitism).
3)Too bureaucratic. Every decision seems to have had to go through conference, and this or that committee.
Every politically correct member seems to have had an input.
A lack of commitment to defence, (the push the button argument).
4) A lack of clarity on economic policy.
In the future, they could do with more power in the hands of the leader to act swiftly.
In spite of approval from 163 economists, they should have also had their manifesto costed by the O.B.R. and the I.F.S. to bolster economic credibility.
Whilst in opposition, a leader with widespread authority could be elected / re-elected every twelve months, to avoid laxity.
A shame Corbyn is still hanging in there until the last possible moment. Obviously protecting his reputation and parrying any suggestion of personal blame.
Milliband wont help either. Maybe his brother could.
1) Corbyns association with terrorism.
2) very weak leadership, unable to deal with problems quickly and decisively. (Antisemitism).
3)Too bureaucratic. Every decision seems to have had to go through conference, and this or that committee.
Every politically correct member seems to have had an input.
A lack of commitment to defence, (the push the button argument).
4) A lack of clarity on economic policy.
In the future, they could do with more power in the hands of the leader to act swiftly.
In spite of approval from 163 economists, they should have also had their manifesto costed by the O.B.R. and the I.F.S. to bolster economic credibility.
Whilst in opposition, a leader with widespread authority could be elected / re-elected every twelve months, to avoid laxity.
A shame Corbyn is still hanging in there until the last possible moment. Obviously protecting his reputation and parrying any suggestion of personal blame.
Milliband wont help either. Maybe his brother could.
Labour need to start thinking now, on how they will get back into power. It's a start. They don't need to think too hard about where it went wrong. Regardless of them saying there was no single cause, there was. It was Corbyn more than Brexit, in my opinion, although there was probably a combination of the two. Corbyn should have resigned straight after the result. He's done enough damage. Why is he hanging on? Does he need the money?
The first thing they need to sort out is how they select their leader. It's been a rolling disaster with Brown's succession, Ed chosen over David Milliband & Corbyn put in (and re-elected) by left wing activists.It shouldn't all be about union influence & left wing credentials, they need someone with a bit of charisma that the voters will warm to. (And it's not Kier Starmer!)
Labour has relied on its heartland, its core voters to supply it with Members of Parliament for decades. Tony Blair was parachuted in a safe NorthEast England constituency to get him into the HoC.
The EU Referendum vote did not split down party lines. For Labour, the heartlands voted to Leave, and the Metropolitan areas voted Remain.
The leadership of the Labour Party is very London centric, and they listened to their Remain voting friends and constituents. When they voted at Conference and wrote their manifesto, they ignored the views of their core voters and backtracked on their 2017 election commitment to respect the referendum vote.
They gambled on a (garbled) re-run the referendum pledge, which a lot of their constituents didn’t want. It was a very bad call by those London based policy makers, and the people across the rest of the country rejected it.
A Commission to Review what went wrong is more being seen to be doing something, rather than a genuine exploration of what went wrong. It is very clear what went wrong, and who is to blame, and what needs to be done to remedy the situation.
The EU Referendum vote did not split down party lines. For Labour, the heartlands voted to Leave, and the Metropolitan areas voted Remain.
The leadership of the Labour Party is very London centric, and they listened to their Remain voting friends and constituents. When they voted at Conference and wrote their manifesto, they ignored the views of their core voters and backtracked on their 2017 election commitment to respect the referendum vote.
They gambled on a (garbled) re-run the referendum pledge, which a lot of their constituents didn’t want. It was a very bad call by those London based policy makers, and the people across the rest of the country rejected it.
A Commission to Review what went wrong is more being seen to be doing something, rather than a genuine exploration of what went wrong. It is very clear what went wrong, and who is to blame, and what needs to be done to remedy the situation.
Both main parties are, in essence, coalitions (The Conservatives have known this for decades, and know how to cope, hence campaigning for either side in the referendum was allowed, for instance).
Labour have only ever been successful when there is a coalition between "working class" and "theoretical intellectuals". Neither group is truly homogeneous, but sometimes drift together. The latter group are united by "knowing" what the others need. The referendum vote split this coalition. Now the party is dominated by the theorists who think they know what's best; they haven't a clue about the real world. However, as they are currently in charge, you can see them using the party machine to perpetuate themselves (hence the pause for "reflection", in reality for getting all their pieces in place). Kinnock faced a smaller version of the problem with tribune. This time it is a thousand times worse. And there isn't an obvious Kinnock-figure waiting in the wings - likely candidates have been bottling confrontation since Brown.
Labour have only ever been successful when there is a coalition between "working class" and "theoretical intellectuals". Neither group is truly homogeneous, but sometimes drift together. The latter group are united by "knowing" what the others need. The referendum vote split this coalition. Now the party is dominated by the theorists who think they know what's best; they haven't a clue about the real world. However, as they are currently in charge, you can see them using the party machine to perpetuate themselves (hence the pause for "reflection", in reality for getting all their pieces in place). Kinnock faced a smaller version of the problem with tribune. This time it is a thousand times worse. And there isn't an obvious Kinnock-figure waiting in the wings - likely candidates have been bottling confrontation since Brown.
The electorate are more worldly wise than the Labour party and not half as stupid. When Corbyn was first elected as leader, I remember him banging on about how he was going to build factories. I don’t, however, recall him ever mentioning what these factories were going to produce, where, in a highly competitive global market, they were going to sell their wares, or how they were going to sell at a price that would enable them to turn their factories into viable, thriving businesses and give the workers the much lauded pay rises they promised. Corbyn’s impossibly idealistic notions frighten the wits out of ‘the working man’ - which is the vast majority of us. The working man no longer trudges out in the snow every day, cloth cap on head, tin lunchbox in hand, to earn a pittance, but enjoys his creature comforts as he should - and he wants to maintain that. And Labour frightens the life out of business, the lifeblood of the economy, too with their plans for nationalisation and to interfere in the running of private companies. Labour just doesn’t get it and whilst their plan seems to be to continue with their unworkable and damaging strategy, it will be a very long time before they do. In short, times have changed, few want what Labour is offering - and the majority never will. The hard left will hang on - and the electorate don't like it - not one bit. We are witnessing Labour in its death throes.
"Doesn't matter what you think of him - he's right!"
And who was it that was on the far right of the Labour party who swung it right of the established centre ground, making it almost inevitable that there would be an overcorrection to the left not long after he stopped being it's leader ?
Anyway, Labour leadership was just one element of many. The lack of support for representation of the public's view, as should be the case in a country that likes to think of itself as democracy, was more than enough to make them unelectable.
And who was it that was on the far right of the Labour party who swung it right of the established centre ground, making it almost inevitable that there would be an overcorrection to the left not long after he stopped being it's leader ?
Anyway, Labour leadership was just one element of many. The lack of support for representation of the public's view, as should be the case in a country that likes to think of itself as democracy, was more than enough to make them unelectable.
Probably best the new leader isn't the far left Rebecca Long-Bailey.
It would appear she is a liar.
https:/
It would appear she is a liar.
https:/
//Probably best the new leader isn't the far left Rebecca Long-Bailey.
It would appear she is a liar.//
Some readers may recall the "Monty Python" sketch (which I cannot immediately find) where a son tells his father that he does not want to follow him into a career of chartered accountancy but instead wants to become a coal miner. Something along these lines:
"My father was an accountant and his father before 'im. But oh no. Accountancy college is not good enough for you. You want to go up North and become a bloody coal miner. You and your poncey Northern mates!"
In order to elect a different brand of leader the Labour Party must either change its method of selection or change its membership. It is odds on that another Corbynite will be elected and consign them, bar a real cods up from the Tories, to yet another GE defeat. As somebody told JC after the election "You need to get out of London and stop surrounding yourself with people who tell you you're great."
What concerns me is that, despite all their obvious multifarious shortcomings, more than ten million people still voted for them. They can't all be Thespians or live in Islington.
It would appear she is a liar.//
Some readers may recall the "Monty Python" sketch (which I cannot immediately find) where a son tells his father that he does not want to follow him into a career of chartered accountancy but instead wants to become a coal miner. Something along these lines:
"My father was an accountant and his father before 'im. But oh no. Accountancy college is not good enough for you. You want to go up North and become a bloody coal miner. You and your poncey Northern mates!"
In order to elect a different brand of leader the Labour Party must either change its method of selection or change its membership. It is odds on that another Corbynite will be elected and consign them, bar a real cods up from the Tories, to yet another GE defeat. As somebody told JC after the election "You need to get out of London and stop surrounding yourself with people who tell you you're great."
What concerns me is that, despite all their obvious multifarious shortcomings, more than ten million people still voted for them. They can't all be Thespians or live in Islington.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles9 mins ago
Crosswords17 mins ago
ChatterBank18 mins ago
