Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

  1. #1
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    This week, by any measure, has been awful for Labour.

    We've had the data loss fiasco, we've lent Northern Rock £24 billion quid, we've had officials saying that "Actually, 28 days is enough, thanks", and finally now we seem to have realised that Des Brown is a part-time defence secretary (presumably 2 ongoing wars not being enough to keep him busy, he's also Secretary of State for Scotland). I may have missed out a couple of catastrophes, I lost track after a while.

    Two whole months ago, Gordon Brown was seen as "competent but boring" - he could plausibly have called and won an election based on his competence and record.

    Now? He'd be laughed out of 10 Downing Street.

    Is this a temporary blip, or is this the Labour Black Wednesday equivalent? Will we see this week as the turning point, the time when Labour finally lost it, or will this be something Brown can bounce back from?

  2. #2
    Registered User Keefy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Over Hill and Dale
    Posts
    426
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    How can Labour "loose competence" when they never had it in the first place?

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    6,709
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    We've had the data loss fiasco
    Not the government's fault.
    we've lent Northern Rock £24 billion quid
    Not the government's fault
    we've had officials saying that "Actually, 28 days is enough, thanks"
    ...ok, I'll give you that one. Although the police are still saying they want longer.
    Des Brown is a part-time defence secretary (presumably 2 ongoing wars not being enough to keep him busy, he's also Secretary of State for Scotland). I may have missed out a couple of catastrophes
    That's hardly a 'catastrophe'.
    The data loss has been attributed to the cost-saving measure of amalgamating HMC and HMIR into HMRC; the real problems for the armed services are not whether they have a full time defence minister but lack of resources.

    Who's gonna volunteer to pay more taxes? I will. I'll pay an additional 1% of my income if it will pay for better schools, hospitals, government departments that are operating efficiently, etc etc.

  4. #4
    An Eclectic Toaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,042
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    ... and finally now we seem to have realised that Des Brown is a part-time defence secretary (presumably 2 ongoing wars not being enough to keep him busy, he's also Secretary of State for Scotland).
    Scottish Secretary is a non-job since devolution - the last holder of the post's sole major task was to organise the Scottish parliament elections.

    Though it's a testament to that guy's "skill" that he even managed to screw that up...

    And it's Des Browne, not Brown.

    On your general point - could you see the Tories handling any of these issues any better? For instance, cost cutting at HMRC contributed to the disc fiasco - can't see a Tory government turning round and saying "oh, they need a bigger budget"...

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    bedford
    Posts
    4,899
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    ... we've had officials saying that "Actually, 28 days is enough, thanks"...
    I have not been paying a lot of attention to the news, but I was under the impression that the Conservative Party was also of that view.

  6. #6
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart M View Post
    Scottish Secretary is a non-job since devolution - the last holder of the post's sole major task was to organise the Scottish parliament elections.
    Even if he only spends a couple of hours a week on it, that's 2 hours he's not spending managing the, hello, two wars we're currently fighting.

    Though it's a testament to that guy's "skill" that he even managed to screw that up...

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart M View Post
    On your general point - could you see the Tories handling any of these issues any better?
    No, but I'm not talking about the Tories - hell, I'm not even talking about the reality. I'm talking about the public confidence - and clearly this has been dented. When even Alastair Darling says his confidence is shaken, I think it's pretty uncontroversial for me to say that about the rest of the public.

    So, again, my question is, do people think this has been a blip, or has it been a turning point?

  7. #7
    An Eclectic Toaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,042
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    Even if he only spends a couple of hours a week on it, that's 2 hours he's not spending managing the, hello, two wars we're currently fighting.

    Though it's a testament to that guy's "skill" that he even managed to screw that up...
    Oi! Stop nicking my diligently researched URLs and passing them off as your own.

    Actually in a sense now, post-May, I agree with you, but not in the sense of the "Secretary of State for Scotland" being a real job. The sole purpose of the Scottish Office now is to make things difficult for the Scottish Government (inevitable now that they are run by different parties), so Des Browne is being distracted.

    Overall, I'd half-agree that this week has been a turning point for Brown. The one thing saving him is that the alternatives don't look any better.

  8. #8
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart M View Post
    Oi! Stop nicking my diligently researched URLs and passing them off as your own.
    Huh, that's weird, must have missed the cut&paste somehow. Mind you, it reads quite well doesn't it?

  9. #9
    An Eclectic Toaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,042
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    Huh, that's weird, must have missed the cut&paste somehow. Mind you, it reads quite well doesn't it?
    I don't mind really - anything which shows up this particular character for the muppet he is, is welcome. I mean, not only is Alexander a schemer, he's an incompetent schemer, if the Scottish elections fiasco and the "Election that never was" are anything to go by. And that's the worst sort for everyone.

    I read somewhere recently that the current Cabinet has the highest proportion of "people that never had a real job" in modern history. Brown has surrounded himself almost exclusively with policy wonks (Alexander, Balls), career politicians (like himself and the Millibands), and lawyers*. Interesting, given that this was supposed to be the end of spin, isn't it?

    * I don't necessarily mean lawyer etc. isn't a "real job". Typically, however, the kind of politician who comes from a legal background doesn't have much history as a working lawyer.

  10. #10
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart M View Post
    I read somewhere recently that the current Cabinet has the highest proportion of "people that never had a real job" in modern history. Brown has surrounded himself almost exclusively with policy wonks (Alexander, Balls), career politicians (like himself and the Millibands), and lawyers*. Interesting, given that this was supposed to be the end of spin, isn't it?
    The Cabinet are a bunch of no-hopers aren't they? For the first time in, ooh, 20 years, the Tory frontbench team looks more competent than Labour's. I struggle to even remember who the Foreign Secretary is - and I'm interested in politics.

    Which is another parallel to the Conservatives in the mid-90s - Major's last cabinet were almost totally forgettable. You need a strong and confident leader to appoint high-profile people - if you're weak and indecisive, you're worried about survival and so go for loyalty instead of competence.

    Mind you, Browne still has a long way to go before he can match the dream team of Jonathan "Sword of truth" Aitken (defence minister) and Stephen "Death by orange" Milligan (his parliamentary aide) during the Major years.

  11. #11
    An Eclectic Toaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,042
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    For the first time in, ooh, 20 years, the Tory frontbench team looks more competent than Labour's.
    Having looked through the Shadow Cabinet in Wikipedia, I'd emphasise the word "looks" in the above statement. There's a lot of Hooray Henrys in there (Cameron, Osbourne), weather-vane politicians, and people who are actually quite unpleasant when you scratch the surface. And let's not forget, this is a party in which Boris Johnson is considered a "heavyweight". I'd say Hague and Davis are competent, but that's about it.

    Right now, I think it's what the Lib Dems do on the UK stage in the next couple of years that's crucial. If they perform well, a hung parliament at Westminster is a real possibility. Scottish Labour's performance at Holyrood may also be a factor: their new leader is continuing to make a fool of herself right now, especially compared to Salmond. It would only take few more points slippage in the polls for that tranche of Scots Labour MPs to start looking vulnerable. For example, if Darling continues to look this incompetent, his Edinburgh seat (historically containing many Tory areas) could fall to tactical voting*.

    To some extent though I don't care much. A Tory Government at Westminster would inevitably lead to more devolution in Scotland, so they'd have little impact on the day-to-day politics up here. It's only on the global issues like foreign policy and macroeconomics that Tory vs. Labour would be an issue in Scotland, and frankly the two of them are peas in a pod on these.

    *On looking at the 2005 election result for Darling's constituency, I noted that the UK Independence candidate was one William Boys. I can't help but feel he'd have had better luck campaigning in the Glasgow Govan seat

  12. #12
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart M View Post
    I'd say Hague and Davis are competent, but that's about it.
    Well yeah, but they're in 2 of the top 4 jobs. Let's face it, 50% competence is astonishingly good for a political party.

    Agree with your other points - Labour seem to be self-destructing in spectacular style in Scotland, what's all that about? If there were another Scottish election, I'm sure the SNP'd gain seats from them - they might even get a workable majority.

  13. #13
    An Eclectic Toaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,042
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Labour: "Loss of competence"?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    Agree with your other points - Labour seem to be self-destructing in spectacular style in Scotland, what's all that about? If there were another Scottish election, I'm sure the SNP'd gain seats from them - they might even get a workable majority.
    On the Scottish Parliament side, a continuing slide in Labour fortunes would undoubtedly result in gains for the others because of our (thankfully) proportional voting system. But for the SNP to gain a working majority, they'd have to be taking votes off the Tories, Lib Dems etc. too. A single-party majority is not likely to happen at Holyrood anytime soon...

    The Westminster situation is much more complicated, because you have FPTP voting in what is a 4-party system in Scotland. The most vulnerable Westminster Labour seats in Scotland actually tend not to have the SNP second. A simple Labour-SNP swing would not result in many SNP gains - if anything it gives seats to the Tories and Lib Dems. The SNP tends to be 2nd in the rock-solid Labour seats in the West of Scotland. By the time the swing is large enough to tip these seats to the SNP, they'd be winning everything else too, and you could tear up your Union Jacks.

    The crucial issue is if Labour become so unpopular that tactical voting comes into play. Scottish voters have proved to be quite savvy with tactical voting in the past when they identify an "enemy": witness the Tory wipeout in 1992. In that case, combined with Labour voter apathy (not unusual in Scotland), you could see Labour seats disappear like snow off a dyke outside the Glasgow/Lanarkshire heartlands. In many such seats, particularly in Lothian and Fife, there's a strong 3rd-place candidate. Those votes transferred would easily topple the Labour incumbent.

    As to why Labour is in trouble in Scotland? Well, part of it is genuinely political - Trident renewal, Iraq, the recent cockups - but IMO the main factor is the slow disintegration of the Labour establishment. For example, the level of media incest with Labour in Scotland is alarming at times - but it's beginning to unravel. Remember Kirsty Wark's interview of Alex Salmond on Newsnight about Blair's Lockerbie-Libya fiasco, which was so obviously biased, the Beeb had to apologise? She holidays occasionally with previous (Labour) First Minister Jack McConnell. All very cosy: a few years ago that sort of stuff was par for the course.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Ethics and Child labour
    By Heather in forum Chit Chat
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 31st-August-2007, 08:07 AM
  2. Suggestions for Slave Labour Please
    By Bombay Sapphire in forum Chit Chat
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 7th-June-2005, 02:50 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •