ChatterBank5 mins ago
The Damage Is Done If You Ask Me
10 Answers
http:// news.sk y.com/s tory/13 68531/l abour-p air-den y-secre t-pact- over-mi liband
The one thing that surprise me is that they dont seem to have a sucession plan. What if Ed went to meet his maker, surely they would not hang around waiting for someone else to step up?
All the papers seem to be carrying this one even the lefty rags so surely Ed has now been compromised no matter what his shadow cabinet do?
The one thing that surprise me is that they dont seem to have a sucession plan. What if Ed went to meet his maker, surely they would not hang around waiting for someone else to step up?
All the papers seem to be carrying this one even the lefty rags so surely Ed has now been compromised no matter what his shadow cabinet do?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. 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.Because jno it is not just the story is it. Whilst I appreciate you need to try and deflect from the failings of your beloved labour party, please try and take the rose tinted off for a moment and see it for what it is.
The story would probably go away if it wasn't for all the other things:
There is dissent and criticism of the Labour leader inside the Parliamentary Labour Party, lots of it. And it isn't just coming from a few fed up Blairites who backed Ed's brother in 2010 and have never accepted his leadership.
And there's plenty to criticise. He dithers in decision making, MPs complain, and surrounds himself with Yes men (there are very few women) in his office and cronies in his inner circle.
His party conference speech was a disaster, leaving out the passages on deficit and immigration, and he bombed in the Scottish referendum campaign. It's claimed his confidence is "shot" since the conference disaster.
Then there have been the dodgy photo-ops and TV images. First was the disastrous bacon butty debacle, then the feminist T-shirt allegedly - although that was disputed - made in a sweatshop and then handing money to a beggar, an attempted kind gesture that backfired.
The story would probably go away if it wasn't for all the other things:
There is dissent and criticism of the Labour leader inside the Parliamentary Labour Party, lots of it. And it isn't just coming from a few fed up Blairites who backed Ed's brother in 2010 and have never accepted his leadership.
And there's plenty to criticise. He dithers in decision making, MPs complain, and surrounds himself with Yes men (there are very few women) in his office and cronies in his inner circle.
His party conference speech was a disaster, leaving out the passages on deficit and immigration, and he bombed in the Scottish referendum campaign. It's claimed his confidence is "shot" since the conference disaster.
Then there have been the dodgy photo-ops and TV images. First was the disastrous bacon butty debacle, then the feminist T-shirt allegedly - although that was disputed - made in a sweatshop and then handing money to a beggar, an attempted kind gesture that backfired.
// they dont seem to have a sucession plan. //
Miliband isn't very good and I will not pretend he is, but he will be Labour leader at the next General Election. These stories are without foundation.
Parties support their leaders even if they are useless (IDS being the recent exception). Hague and Howard were clearly useless but the Party stuck with them until they lost an election.
Opposition Parties rarely have a Succession Plan because they generally are led by new leaders because the old leaders lost a General Election. They have to lose an election before they are changed again. Other than IDS, I cannot think of a leader removed before an election.
Not sure the Conservatives were following a succession plan when John Major replaced Margaret Thatcher. He wasn't the obvious choice. Cameron definitely was not the choice of the Parliamentary Conservatives MPs, he was elected by the constituency members.
All of that is not to say I would not like Miliband to go, I would. The very latest they could have changed leader was at last month's Conference. It is too late now.
Miliband isn't very good and I will not pretend he is, but he will be Labour leader at the next General Election. These stories are without foundation.
Parties support their leaders even if they are useless (IDS being the recent exception). Hague and Howard were clearly useless but the Party stuck with them until they lost an election.
Opposition Parties rarely have a Succession Plan because they generally are led by new leaders because the old leaders lost a General Election. They have to lose an election before they are changed again. Other than IDS, I cannot think of a leader removed before an election.
Not sure the Conservatives were following a succession plan when John Major replaced Margaret Thatcher. He wasn't the obvious choice. Cameron definitely was not the choice of the Parliamentary Conservatives MPs, he was elected by the constituency members.
All of that is not to say I would not like Miliband to go, I would. The very latest they could have changed leader was at last month's Conference. It is too late now.
// Hague and Howard were clearly useless but the Party stuck with them until they lost an election. //
No-one resigns just before an election. That's pathetic. even if it become clear they've got no chance of winning, they have to go through the motions, and lose - that's when they resign and move on.
I see Miliband as the William Hague of the Labour party. He 'll probably go and and have a great career in some other role, but he got the job of party leader too soon.
No-one resigns just before an election. That's pathetic. even if it become clear they've got no chance of winning, they have to go through the motions, and lose - that's when they resign and move on.
I see Miliband as the William Hague of the Labour party. He 'll probably go and and have a great career in some other role, but he got the job of party leader too soon.