Jackie Ashley in brutal form in the Guardian today. She is unhappy that Alan Johnson, a candidate for the deputy leadership of the Labour party, is boasting of the support of John Prescott:
So it seems obvious that the last thing the Labour party needs is a blokeish deputy leader who is proud to claim endorsement from the party’s original male chauvinist pig. John Prescott, remember, is the man who just a short while ago was all over the newspapers with his secretary’s legs round his neck. His view of women is that they are most useful when on their knees under a desk, “servicing” an important man who can barely be bothered to look up from his papers. John Prescott is worse than a joke, he’s a disgrace, and why Alan Johnson wants to boast that he is the natural successor to Prescott mystifies me.
Jackie, you may be mystified, but it is clear as crystal to me. Alan Johnson is happy to boast of Prescott’s support, because he (Johnson) is not really talking to us, the general public. Amongst the people whose votes he wants (eg the unions), Prescott’s support counts for something. What then does he care if the general public regard Prescott with loathing? It’s not our votes he wants. We have no value to him right now.
Jackie Ashley obviously has not realised that the forthcoming Labour leadership and deputy leadership elections are not about the general public. Our views don’t matter. If they did, someone credible within the Labour party would have challenged Gordon Brown before now. And as for the deputy leadership, all that the candidates are concerned about is getting into office. Short of the devil himself, they will boast of the backing of anyone, so long as it proves useful.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Bel
Throughout this election the candidates, inevitably, will focus on the constituencies which vote - I don’t have a vote and,I assume, you don’t either. It is perfectly appropriate that candidates seek backing and,hopefully, votes from within each of the constituencies and, given that, the general public don’t matter - directly.
Indirectly, the general public matter hugely even in the leadership election / coronation. How each candidate is viewed in the next 6 weeks or so is likely to have a major effect on how votes are cast in the dep leadership election.
In terms of Brown it is the public perception which will be crucial to Labour’s hopes at the next general election.
For Johnson he has had to balance the benefit of Prescott’s backing - votes - with the potential negativity associated with Prescott - public perception. We shall see how his choice pans out.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
Calum, Johnson has had to balance nothing. He has wholeheartedly accepted the endorsement of Prescott. Public perception doesn’t come into it at all, and why should it? We are not any use to him now. He can take the public perception into account when he wants something from us. Right now he does not, so he won’t.
I don’t agree that the general public matter ‘hugely’ as you put it, right now. If we did, someone else would have made sure Gordon Brown faced a proper contest, rather than the easy ride he will get with McDonnell. I am not making any judgement about that, merely stating the position.
Yes, it is only to be expected that the candidates seek the backing of the people who matter. That is exactly the point I was making. I was pointing out that Jackie Ashley had failed to see that that was the point with Johnson’s wholehearted delight in Prescott’s endorsement.
May 15th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Bel
Within all parties, politicians will weigh up the consequences of standing / not standing in terms of their personal outcome. In their position I think all (or at least most) of us would do the same.
I don’t believe for a second that David Cameron stood for the leadership of the Conservative party by considering firstly the general public. I imagine he saw the chance of becoming leader and then took the steps necesary to achieve that goal. Was he interested in the public at that point - no? He was interested in David Cameron. I don’t blame him for that. He has done what any politician would do. Conservative, Labour, Liberal .. whatever they’re all the same: me first and then the country.
“…all that the candidates are concerned about is getting into office. Short of the devil himself, they will boast of the backing of anyone, so long as it proves useful.” Again I think thi applies to all.
We’ll just have to disagree on how important is the public.
May 15th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Hi Calum
At which point in my post did I say I was blaming Alan Johnson? Jackie Ashley professed herself mystified that Alan Johnson was proud of Prescott’s support. I was explaining to ‘her’ that there was nothing to be mystified about. He was simply looking out for himself, as politicians do. I simply stated the fact for the benefit of Jackie Ashley; our opinion does not matter right now, so he doesn’t care about that.
It is true that all the candidates are concerned about is getting into office. And this will most likely hold true for candidates of any party. Surely it is possible for me to make a comment without it being assumed that I am attacking Labour alone?
My one criticism of Labour here is the lack of a credible contest re the leadership. But no matter. If they are all so scared of Gordon Brown and concerned for their own jobs, that is fine. I expect no more and no less.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Hi Bel
I did not assume that you were attacking Labour alone. I thought you might be but I didn’t know. Therefore, I made the point that whatever we think of the Labour candidates they are behaving as all politicians do.
I didn’t realise that comments had to be restricted tightly to the original post. I had always assumed that with comments one could “drift” the post in slightly different directions. If you wish comments to stick strictly to the post then let me know I’ll think about conforming.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
If you wish comments to stick strictly to the post then let me know I’ll think about conforming.
Of course not.
No such rules on this blog, comments may meander wherever they please, within the limits of the law.
But I see what you mean.
I just assumed, wrongly as it turned out, that you were wondering why I was attacking Labour when Cameron did the same thing. I was just trying to make the point that I was not. Strange as it may seem, I wasn’t even attacking Labour. I think I’ve become world-weary and cynical, and don’t expect anything better from our politicians. Sorry for the misunderstanding, I just drew an assumption from your introduction of Cameron into the post.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
Calum, I must admit, when I read your post, I also assumed you were taking Bel to task for picking on Labour when Cameron did the same thing.
That said, I agree with both of you. Politicians are governed by self-interest, and nothing else. Maybe if we as a nation accepted that, we wouldn’t be quite so disappointed when they act true to type.
Take the proposed amendments to the freedom of information Act exempting them from the Act. None but a shameless group of people could even think of such a thing.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Hello TL, haven’t seen you in ages.
Just got your email, expect my reply soon.
May 15th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
Hi Bel
There was misunderstanding on both sides.
Also, if truth be told I didn’t assume that you were attacking Labour but I thought it more than likely. Therefore, apologies for my being less than honest.
May 16th, 2007 at 8:51 am
at the risk of having eggs thrown at me i have to admit i like prescott. I’d not want him as prime minister but hes always seemed a typical bloke, not aidealized spin docter polished image, but a guy that does what he thinks is right. I dont agree with his morals but i have the greatest of respect for his say what you think , just get it done attitude. More of that and less spin, isnt that what labour wants?
Which i guess raises a embaressing questions. Do conservative supporters want the current government to have the best possiblke leader and deputy to lead the country or would they prefer a less pair so as to loose the next election. Thats not an accusation against anyone, merly a pause for thought about bias.
May 16th, 2007 at 11:46 am
That’s OK, Calum. I’ll be back to my Labour-bashing ways soon enough.
Dolbyn, as a conservative, I would like to see Gordon Brown become Prime Minister,for two reasons.
1) He will be easy to beat at the next elections.
2) The results of his disastrous handling of the economy will soon be upon us. I would like to see him in place as Prime Minister, so he can carry the can for that, and not some poor sap.
Having said that, I am very disillusioned with the Conservative Party. If they were to win the next election, we will just have more of the same.