Okay, so Tony is leaving within 12 months. Given that there is conference coming up and then the queens speech etc. who would be the best candidate to lead Labour into the next general election?

Everyone is assuming that Gordon would be automatically selected by the party as the successor, but do you have any other ideas, and when would be the most practical time for the leader of the party to step down?

Does it really matter .......... same policies whoever is in charge.

And as with all politicians their first priority is to stuff their pockets with as much cash as possible.

That's the problem - there is no one in the race with good leadership capabilities.

I used to have time for Brown but I don't think he has what it takes. It looks like he tried a coup this week and screwed it up.

Behind the scenes it appears that labour is droppig back in to some very old bad habits of the sort I witnessed when I was a member in the 1980s and early 1990s.

For Christ's sake, people, get on with running the country for a while; deal with your blood letting in private. As it stands we must be a joke across teh world; what foreign government will bother listening to us if they're not sure who's going to be in charge (and what policies will be running) in a year's time?

And domestically - we have so many issues that who gets to put their feet under the table at Number 10 is the last thing that should be bothering the politicians. Showing some respect for the good of the country would be a good move.

Does it really matter .......... same policies whoever is in charge.

Well it does matter Spiderpete, regardless of our personal opinions about historically bad decisons the person selected will be representing the UK in international policy and they are the face of the party..

The torys have David 'I love nelson mandela' Cameron.. who will represent the current party in power?

Your nomination would be?

I really don't care. They're all the same, it makes no difference who holds the title of PM.

If the politicians put half as much energy into governing this country properly as they do squabbling amongst themselves, there might actually be some sensible decisions taken about this country's future.

Far too much self-indulgence about.

StarSparkle

Your nomination would be?

Someone to hold the fort until someone better came along. :)

Having said that - in a few years Miliband might be a good contender.

I'm not sure about Clarke given the astonishingly poor judgemnet of his statements over the last few days.

Reid might work as a short term 'fire fighting and inter-regnum' leader, and would give the opportunity for others - like Johnson? - to become deputy leader.

So...Reid for now, then Johnson, with Milliband further down the line.

If it appears in the Situations Vacant column of The Times I’ll probably apply. CV would obviously include “membership of SF with a leaning towards dictatorship.” Trouble is, Tony’s already into it. I suppose I could add that I’m a Yorkshire-born Englishman and argue that while I’m not the preferred Scotsman I do have Scottish ancestors on my mother’s side (one of them fought for Bonnie Prince Charlie, so I’m saying it now before MI5 discover it and leak it to the Press).

I also have the temerity to tell Bush that his ‘friendship’ isn’t all that welcome if it includes having our soldiers dying because his own can’t manage the job in Afghanistan. I’d also have the balls to sack Two-Jags and all the unelected Lords.

Better still, I’ve no connection with the legal profession, or the estate agencies or politicians in general, so I’ll not be lying through my teeth every time I open my mouth.

If they don’t want me after that, I’ll take ’em to a tribunal on the grounds that I aint got the job cos I’m too old and I’m in a wheelchair, and it aint fair!

Your nomination would be?

and my answer is ............

posted by StarSparkle
I really don't care. They're all the same, it makes no difference who holds the title of PM.

sums it up pretty well.

P.S. Home rule for Yorkshire — whether they want it or not. The Tories had their ‘Iron Woman’, so I’d be Labour’s ‘Iron Man’. But just remembered, I’m not a Labour Party member and I don’t vote for ’em. Does it matter? I’ve read on other threads that employers shouldn’t ask employees what their political leanings are.

In a sense it's not that important exactly who " runs " the Labour Party because Labour has a built-in problem that it has never been able to solve for any length of time . Sooner or later [ usually sooner ! ] the Party is torn asunder by its two wings .
From its very beginning Labour has been made up of the ' Trade Unionists ' and the ' Armchair Socialists ' , broadly speaking .
The Unionists who originally created the Party to enable the working classes to have a voice in Parliament , obviously regard themselves as the " soul of the party " . they certainly have bankrolled it over the years. These are the practical men and women , the horny-handed sons and daughters of toil . They aren't much interested in grand ideas or theories but more in decent working conditions .
The "Intellectuals" are a more diverse group [ Someone once boasted that the Labour Party was a " wide church ' . Very true ! ]. In this group are the Fabians [ the Tribune Group ] , the closet Communists , the theorists , the social manipulators , the Internationalists and the supporters of the Underdog , wherever and whoever and whyever ; in fact anyone on the Left who can't use a spanner .
These two groups have often hated each other more than any outsiders . There have been countless fall-outs between these two groups , in various forms over the years .
Enter Mr. Blair , with his grand plan to dump the proletarian , hard-line trade unionist face of the party , to make it electable . Now , there's a cry that he's moved too far to the Right .
Whoever is the new Leader of the labour Party faces this insoluble problem . They try to please the factory worker and the social worker is up in arms--------or vice-versa . They usually get elected as do the Tories , on the rebound , but due to their internal contradictions they stay in power for a shorter time .Leader ? Not that important .

My honest, impartial advice is that Alan Johnson would be their best bet. There's now so much bad blood between the Blair and Brown camps that feuding would continue if Brown took over. Brown does seem to have shortcomings with his presentational skills and ability to delegate and teamworking. His Scottishness might also be a problem (and for Reid also); now that a lot of Westminster/Whitehall business is England-only, English voters might question how appropriate it is to have a Scottish MP in the PM job.

On timing, probably most Labour people would have been content to let him have his 10 years as PM. However, devolution is again coming back to bite Labour: the Scottish and Welsh parties want him out before their assembly elections next May. That brings things sufficiently far forward to say: why not just announce the start of a leadership contest at the party conference in a couple of weeks' time?
The ideal scenario for all us non-Labour people, however, is that: Blair staggers on till the early spring (amidst periodic Brownite sniping); there's a divisive leadership contest; Brown narrowly wins; after the briefest of honeymoons voters go off him; Labour gets hammered at the next General Election. :D

Tam Dalyell, or failing that Gwyneth Dunwoody. Best of a bad lot.

David Cameron looks like he is after the job.

Ruth Kelly for me.........she can put a barb or two across the Despatch Box aimed at the Opposition Leader. :cool:

David Milliband - might be Blair MKII but that's what the people want... without the delusions that too many years in power always brings.

Labour will discard him at their peril.

I don't know about who should, but I think that had David Blunkett not had that unfortunate liason with the dratted yank, then he would have been a serious contender.

anybody but that sweaty sock gordon brown 100% t***

then he would have been a serious contender.

Thank "deity of choice" for affairs:thumbsup:.:clap:


As for who should run the "LieBore" party..... Who cares? They (mostly) all backed the invasion of Iraq. So it'll just be "same old, same old":rolleyes:.

David Milliband
:gag:

I suspect that, apart from my good self, not all of the advice being offered on this thread is entirely sincere. :hihi:

Bring back Michael Foot.

:gag:

I suspect that, apart from my good self, not all of the advice being offered on this thread is entirely sincere. :hihi:

It's sound advice ;)

At least when it comes to polls which always show people still prefer Blair over Brown when head-to-head against Cameron.

It's the centre-right south that will win the next election and if Labour lose them they completely lose the next election.

Miliband has the advantage of being next generation, like Cameron and as the Lib Dems have shown age really matters nowadays. Though it's debatable with the Lib Dems whether it's their total lack of respect for the electorate which has turned them into 3rd place also-rans.

Bring back Michael Foot.
Yes, and Maggie, they could sit shouting at each other, and forgetting who people were.
Showing each other pictures of the great grand kids, it would be marvellous.

BTW did I tell you I have bought a picture of Maggie for the Mantlepiece in the sitting room?
It keeps the grandchildren away from the fire :hihi: :hihi:

Bill Clinton

Bring back Michael Foot.


Stoppit.

Now go to your room without any supper. :hihi:

Anyone who would have made a return to a real socialist labour party, with a conscience, and a desire to tell the truth, is either dead, too old, or would stand no chance of selection, the labour party is now merely the conservative party in less well cut suits, rotten feuds and toadying.
I shall be voting green in future, even if they do select crusties for election.

I think the Chuckle Brothers would be good - especially at the political game of passing the buck.




To you...

Anyone who would have made a return to a real socialist labour party, with a conscience, and a desire to tell the truth, is either dead, too old, or would stand no chance of selection, the labour party is now merely the conservative party in less well cut suits, rotten feuds and toadying.


Sadly, this is the truth of the situation :(

As a Socialist, I really despair about where to go from here.

StarSparkle

I would like to see John Reid he has some balls and tells it like it is,very rare for a Labour Politician.:thumbsup:

but he's tarnished now by being 'home' secretary.

Boris Johnson would make a lively pm albeit for the other team.
I think Tony should tell Gordon to stuff it, and stay full term :)

Sadly, this is the truth of the situation :(

As a Socialist, I really despair about where to go from here.

Please take some comfort that other people feel worse - as a right-wing elitist I've been driven half-insane by the lunacy of this cabinet.

Ruth Kelly for me.........she can put a barb or two across the Despatch Box aimed at the Opposition Leader. :cool:

I didn't expect you to be a supporter of such a wacko catholic and member of Opus Dei. Remember her first loyalty is to the pope!

Definetely not David Cameron. Jesus, can't have the toffs ruling- gives me creeps. He is so fake can't believe anything he says or does. For example, I seriously doubt if he is a serious cyclist! All my cyclist friends are skinny as a whippet- he is so chubby- can't be a cyclist. I'm also wary of his stunts with the huskies...

Ruth Kelly ...yyyyeeeeuughhhh...that voice gives me the willies

I'm not a fan of any of the leadership candidates, but I just hope that it's not John Reid. The guy is a thug and he scares the s*** out of me. During his younger days he was an enforcer for the communist party, and he's previously spent three days in the hospitality of Serbian war criminal Radavan Karadzic. :o

Anyone but him.

David Cameron would make an excelent Labour leader.

I didn't expect you to be a supporter of such a wacko catholic and member of Opus Dei. Remember her first loyalty is to the pope!

My post was obviously too subtle for many in the audience on SF. :hihi:

What about the Derek Hatton of old, before he deserted his roots and went into P.R.? Surely, Derek is still youg enough to stage a come-back?

Surely someone of his calibre, or someone like dear old Arthur Scargill or that wonderful parliamentarian, Michael Foot is available, somewhere or other?

Only by bringing back the likes of 'The Old Brigade' and a couple of union leaders like Frank Cousins, will the Labour Party re-vitalise itself, recapture its soul and remain for another decade in power, to lead us all to bright and shining future .

So we ended up with Brown. Who else thinks they made a very porr choice?

So we ended up with Brown. Who else thinks they made a very porr choice?

I cant think who could have done it better (or worse).

I cant think who could have done it better (or worse).Surley any Labour leader was destined to dismal failure as soon as the fruits of their polices started to ripen - Blair clearly saw this. They enjoyed a decade of fair weather on the back of Tory economic decisions, and now their own have come home.

Brown will undoubtedly be remembered as one of the least effective and least popular PMs the country has had - ever - but even if he was the most gifted leader alive in the world he'd still have no chance.

Labour and its followers need to open their eyes a little and look around the world - socialism simply does not work, and trying to steer a capitalist democracy down the path of socialism, even bit by bit as they have tried, will end in failure, waste, and needless cost to the taxpayer.

Failiure is an inevitability of capitalism. In a free competetive market you get winners and losers. And as in most competitions, there are more losers than winners.

Waste is an inevitability of capitalism. Companies are always tweaking their products and services to make them better than their rivals. They do this to make more money. Their competitors then have to devise a counter product, not because their current one is suddenly no good; it is to try and claw back their market share. Waste of time, people, natural resources and money.

As for taxation. We may well end up with lower income tax. But you need a job to benefit from that, don't you?

I'm not calling for the end of capitalism - just saying we must all accept that sooner or later, it will go belly up for a wile. I'd rather have a government who tries to cushion the blow for the worst affected

But capitalism is the only model that works naturally, allowing individual talent and effort to be rewarded - it follows Darwinian lines really, allowing the weak and less useful to die out (except that in all of the Western capitalist states we also apply a degree of socialism to look after the needy).

As for firms changing products to compete - I am sure I consider that to be a very good thing.

But capitalism is the only model that works naturally, allowing individual talent and effort to be rewarded - it follows Darwinian lines really, allowing the weak and less useful to die out (except that in all of the Western capitalist states we also apply a degree of socialism to look after the needy).

As for firms changing products to compete - I am sure I consider that to be a very good thing.

I accept everything you say - there is no alternative. But it will always slip up from time to time.
It's just that, to put it in it's simplist term, the best governments are the ones that help the poorest in times of recession.

But capitalism is the only model that works naturally, allowing individual talent and effort to be rewarded - it follows Darwinian lines really, allowing the weak and less useful to die out

Free market capitalism yes, but we don't really do that in the West. We've a long history of bailing out failing businesses and financial institutions, which according to Darwinian lines, should be allowed to fail.

Without the risk of failure, there is no true capitalism. We end up with a system of private profits and socialised losses.

Anyway, back on topic.

1st choice -Tony Benn, failing that, Dennis Skinner.

Anyway, back on topic.

1st choice -Tony Benn, failing that, Dennis Skinner.

Good choice. I agree, and would add John Trickett to the list. Anyone of them will guarantee Labour remain in opposition for a very very long time.:hihi:

Good choice. I agree:

:thumbsup: Well it'd be the first time that a Labour PM would have a positive vote from me, rather than there being no viable alternative.:hihi:

:thumbsup: Well it'd be the first time that a Labour PM would have a positive vote from me, rather than there being no viable alternative.:hihi:

I think the words you are looking for are Labour opposition leader.

I think the forum user "anarchist" should be the next labour party leader. He's so obsessed with criticising everything Gordon Brown does that he must be able to do a much better job! :hihi:

It should be Gordon Brown of course!

I can't believe all the threads that are so critical of him on here. It's bad for Sheffield, it's bad for Britain and it's got to stop. Nice things only from now on!

I would like to see Clare Short as she is a passionate politician with the right ideas for a socialist party. Labour will need to bring her back into the fold first though, but it’s not impossible for labour to forget the reasons they ejecting a member if they are a vote winner.

Even though I'm a conservative supporter, I would not wish to see a dead opposition that would allow a government to run unchecked. We need a credible opposition.

I would like to see Clare Short as she is a passionate politician with the right ideas for a socialist party. Labour will need to bring her back into the fold first though, but it’s not impossible for labour to forget the reasons they ejecting a member if they are a vote winner.

Even though I'm a conservative supporter, I would not wish to see a dead opposition that would allow a government to run unchecked. We need a credible opposition.

I will never forget how Clare Short disgraced herself on a TV program once, how she behaved towards a student, especially when she thought she was off camera. I've never seen such ugly, hypocritical behaviour.

Barry Chuckle

I think the forum user "anarchist" should be the next labour party leader. He's so obsessed with criticising everything Gordon Brown does that he must be able to do a much better job! :hihi:

Not at all GB. He is the perfect man for the job right now. I do hope he stays on after the election defeat, or moves aside for Dennis Skinner. It doesn't get any better than that.:hihi:

I would like to see Clare Short as she is a passionate politician with the right ideas for a socialist party. Labour will need to bring her back into the fold first though, but it’s not impossible for labour to forget the reasons they ejecting a member if they are a vote winner.

Even though I'm a conservative supporter, I would not wish to see a dead opposition that would allow a government to run unchecked. We need a credible opposition.

Sorry but Clare Short is one of the most hypocritical politicians out there. Remember her outrage at the (then) proposed attak on Iraq? Her many TV appearances where she stood there, in all her socialist worker splendour, and decried the planned attack and the way the UN had been by-passed? And what did Miz Short do when the attack finally happened? That's right, bugger all.

Unlike Robin Cook who at least had the courage to stand up for what he believed in, she meekly went along with Blair, too comfortable in her position to give it up over something so flimsy as moral objections..

I think Cameron is a cert for the next PM. Labour have been in power too long and have lost there way over the last few years (if they ever truly had 'a way'). I just can't help but think that Cameron, when/if he does become elected will have carte blanche to do as he pleases with public spending cuts - after all, it's all Brown's fault innit?

Sorry but Clare Short is one of the most hypocritical politicians out there. Remember her outrage at the (then) proposed attak on Iraq? Her many TV appearances where she stood there, in all her socialist worker splendour, and decried the planned attack and the way the UN had been by-passed? And what did Miz Short do when the attack finally happened? That's right, bugger all.

Unlike Robin Cook who at least had the courage to stand up for what he believed in, she meekly went along with Blair, too comfortable in her position to give it up over something so flimsy as moral objections..

I think Cameron is a cert for the next PM. Labour have been in power too long and have lost there way over the last few years (if they ever truly had 'a way'). I just can't help but think that Cameron, when/if he does become elected will have carte blanche to do as he pleases with public spending cuts - after all, it's all Brown's fault innit?

Maybe short was saving her neck. Those who disagreed with Blair tended to fall of mountains or commit suspicious suicide.

Mo Mowlam would have been a good leader for the Labour party.

Who ever it is, should have a spine next time.

Take care

I think the forum user "anarchist" should be the next labour party leader. He's so obsessed with criticising everything Gordon Brown does that he must be able to do a much better job! :hihi:

being as he's peter mandleson in disguise then he probably will be :)

I think Labour missed a trick when Blair left. They should have held an election then, lost to the tories, who would have had the floods and then the downturn to deal with, allowing Labour to save the country in 2011. ;)