We do not need the Labour Party to implode in such massive infighting that someone like Farage gets in (the equivalent to what happened in Australia).
There is some truth in what he's saying; but it cannot go beyond clichés, until and unless the Labour Party are prepared to grasp the real nettle: that whatever else they do, they have to go back to being a left-wing party on the economy and public services. Hell, I'd settle for their going back to being as left-wing on such issues as Heath or Macmillan. The postwar consensus, whatever its limitations, was a lot better than what they have now.
'the latte-sipping, chino-wearing, light Green, inner-city left.'
Sneering at the relatively few people who actually make an effort on behalf of the Labour Party is not going to help them.
'That latter point is really scary – Ukip became ABL (Anyone But Labour).'
Actually UKIP was Anyone But the Main Parties. And let's note that the real by-election winner, with almost a 2/3 majority, was the Why-Bother-to-Vote Party. A problem in itself, of course.
'For Labour, this was a by-election about the NHS. That was what voters ‘brought up on the doorstep’. For voters, visitors and the casual observer it was a by-election about immigration. Even in politics a conversation isn’t simply waiting for your turn to speak – it has to be about engagement. There is a perfectly defensible line to take on Labour’s record on immigration and its plans. It just doesn’t involve not mentioning it. And there is a blindingly obvious link to the NHS – a service that would stop tomorrow without immigrant workers.'
Well, THAT much is true (that immigrants keep the NHS going, a point that is often ignored).
'So too was our response to Ukip raising the grooming and rape of young women in Rochdale. You could see we were outraged. But not by the rapes, instead by the fact the issue was raised. I’d have loved a Labour candidate who could say – ‘That’s right, it was disgusting. Those young women were betrayed. I want to be your MP to work with Simon Danczuk and Tom Watson to tackle historic abuse – and to make sure it never happens again’. '
That's just accepting the UKIP framing of the issue. Labour do NOT condone child sexual abuse; the author himself mentions two well-known campaigners.
'The voice that David Blunkett would bring if he stood for South Yorkshire police and crime commissioner. The voice of working-class morality – and outrage – channelled politically to achieve change.'
David Blunkett? No thanks!!!
'...New Zealand Labour leader and prime minister Norman Kirk who said: ‘New Zealanders don’t ask for much: someone to love, somewhere to live, somewhere to work and something to hope for.’ ..'
New Zealand has not, I believe, suffered as badly in the recession as the UK or Europe; nor, according to the NZ-ers whom I know, has even their current Conservative government been nearly as destructive as ours. Thus, the NZ voters can 'not ask for much'. The Brits, however, do need 'much' at this stage.
'We talk about housing policies when people want a home. We talk about jobs as an end in themselves when people see them as the start of something – the ability to make a downpayment on a dream. We see life as a set of problems to be solved by policies when people see life as something to be lived and enjoyed.'
The point is that homelessness is largely due to the wrong housing policies; and increasingly, to the wrong economic policies in general. And while this may be regrettable in some ways, for most people, and especially for the people whom Labour supposedly most represents, jobs are largely an end in themselves. People need their jobs in order to pay the bills; and moreover, they need their jobs to be sufficiently secure to be able to pay the bills not just today but tomorrow! And life can be 'lived and enjoyed' most easily when policies relieve them from their worst worries about poverty, insecurity, and lack of necessary public services.
= new reply since forum marked as read