You can’t create a narrative out of thin air, all you can do is latch onto what is happening to provide some sort of context for why it is happening.

If the reasoning underpinning any ‘narrative’ is factually-inaccurate or simply empty of content it will gain zero traction in the public consciousness, however well-meaning your sentiments are.

You should not go just because the media are attacking you. You need strong leaders who can stand media pressure it is the same in soccer or sport. You cannot give in the momment in gets tough. The PM has great mental strength the way he recovered from losing an eye as a child and losing a child. Politicans have recovered from this before and there is no opinion survery evidence to suggest milliband would boost the party.
I support the PM staying as leader he has the determination and intelligence to recover. The media will kick who ever is labour leader.

Milliband will not be able to change policy substanitally as he is even more rightist than the present leader, he is a blairite , and we are in economic trouble.
The present leader is OK. Where is the evidence we would get boost in opinion surveys if we changed now.

The PM got a double first at uni, and recovered from many deep blows the loss of an eye, a child, blairite lies about his sexuality, he has alot of good points for him. You cannot just accept bliindly what the right wing media say about him they will make the same claims about milliband. And what do you expect milliband to do? He is not FDR. He is not Obama. He is just an average very uintelligent politican. Chaning the leader would be pandering to panic.

The PM is not toxic OK there is anti scottish section in the media toward him but they are just racist. How long before they go after milliband for being a jew, or straw for being a jew, or any other non english white majority issue.

“You should not go just because the media are attacking you. You need strong leaders who can stand media pressure it is the same in soccer or sport.”

But when it reaches the point that the media aren’t just attacking, but that the general public also agree, it’s gone beyond the media and becomes an issue about the person. Strong leaders, yes. Belligerent leaders unwilling to listen no matter how much they claim they are? No.

“You cannot give in the momment in gets tough.”

He didn’t, and that’s good. What’s bad is he has allowed things to get tougher through his own choices, and has dealt with every situation poorly for the last 6 months.

“The PM has great mental strength the way he recovered from losing an eye as a child and losing a child. ”

Who gives a fuck, can he meaningfully lead the country is all that matter. This isn’t the X-Factor, sob stories don’t win you votes here.

“Politicans have recovered from this before ”

Who has ever recovered from this level of distrust and dislike by the public? Please name one example, and then let’s see if those examples were influenced by fortuitous situations out of their control (as Brown arguably was in his first few months).

“Where is the evidence we would get boost in opinion surveys if we changed now.”

Finally, a meaningful point. As I’ve said on another thread here…I fear that it has gone too far and the toxicity of the PM has spread to the party as a whole. Indeed this is kind of what Sunny is getting at isn’t it?

“You cannot just accept bliindly(sic)”

You slay me, touche.

Lee,

you’re letting the party off the hook and absolving 300-odd parliamentarians of their culpability by saying it’s the PM alone who is toxic.

He is the leader of them and leads by their consent to his coronation. His failure is their failure and his unpopularity is their unpopularity because both their actions have influenced the other.

The leader represents the party just as the members represent the constituencies (well or not at all), so just because they don’t like the consequences of their actions it doesn’t mean they could escape their association with them by dumping him – but that’s poli-tainment!

Lee Griffin He is not as unpopular as you claim. He is more trusted than the tory leader. He is more respected in terrorism and national security. No is he unpopular, just because of who he is. It is the economy, stupid.

He is not pig headed just because he wants to stay. He does listen. Just because he wants to stay as any half decent PM would that does not make him pig headed it makes him the type of leader we are supposed to have. People who want to rule and do good office.

We have not had a single negative economic quarter under his time as chancellor or leader of the party, how is that poor leadership? Thacther had two recessions.

I am not refering to x factor sob stories, when I refer to loss of an eye etc: I am referring to his mental strength he has shown he has mental strength to recover from tough blows, which is vital. We have no worries with his collapsing under this pressure. It is allmost certain the next leader would face the same issue, the same low opinion surveys ratios what if they could not cope with these pressures.

You are wrong to say no politican has recovered from this. This is what happened Clinton in mid term, Bush senior a few months before his 88 elections, Thatcher in the early 80s all faces times like this and went on to win. That is just what happens Milliband would in the same situation so do we get rid of him after 4 months. The public are responding to the press. The press decide who is OK. It is largely anti scottish bigotry from the tory english establishment. And they will go after milliband for being jewish.
I think if the ecnomy recovers we will win if it does not we will lose the leader is not important.

One message to the left stop falling for tory propaganda about labour figures.

The PM is also kind to animals, helps old ladies across the road and always has a kind word for everyone.

if New Labour can successfully decontaminate and portray itself as the party positive about the future

And your point is what?

If I could run the 100m in 9.5 secs…

The press are all gnaging up against the pm as he is scottish it is no wonder he is so low in the opinion surveys. The press smear him all the time. They will do the same to any other labour leader. Liberal conspiracy should not take their lies about him as fact they should counter them.

The PM gave a stackload of aid cash to africa but the left do not stand up for him for this. The left is just accepting any tory propaganda about him. How many lives has the pm saved with his aid cash to africa.
I sense that if the PM was english the liberal media would stand up for him it seems if you are english the left wing media stand up for you. Is this just nationalism people want to get rid of a scottish PM. No matter what good he does. What exaclty would milliband do that uis different to the PM. Nationalise the coal industry what?

“He is more trusted than the tory leader.”

You are a card, aren’t you.

“The PM is also kind to animals, helps old ladies across the road and always has a kind word for everyone..”

And is damn good lookin’.

If the PM was an upper class oxbridge londoner the liberal media would stand up for him, as he is scottish they want rid of him it is just nationalism wantibnf rid of him cause he was born the wrong country.

BenSix How does your link dissprove me. it says he is more trusted.

We should stop falling for tory lies about the leader also i htink there is anti scottish bais against him in the media

BenSix How does your link dissprove me. it says he is more trusted.

That’s comparing him to David Miliband, dear.

The press are all gnaging up against the pm as he is scottish

Is this just nationalism people want to get rid of a scottish PM

as he is scottish they want rid of him

also i htink there is anti scottish bais against him in the media

I’m not sure that you’ve made this point clear enough.

Labour people need to tell the public what good the PM has done here is a list

1. Double first at uni
2. Recovered from losing an eye- showing great mental steength
3. Spoke out against school bullying
4. Longest lasting chancellor for more than 100 years
5. Recovered from losing a child – showing great mental strength
6. Stackload of aid to africa. The UK is the biggest aid donor outside the USA, and is larger per capita than the USA as an aid donor. But since when did saving african peoples lives count as left wing eh!
7. The mini wage
8. Tax credits giving 1000s of £ to the poor
9. No negative economic quarters. Thacther had two recessions.
10. Getting rid of Blair

OK i dissagree with him on nuclear energy, but hopefully nuclear will collapse economically anyway and they will see common sense.

BenSix Don’t call me dear? I am fed up with this macho male sexism of all calling people dear especially as I am a man. LOL

“you’re letting the party off the hook and absolving 300-odd parliamentarians of their culpability by saying it’s the PM alone who is toxic.”

I didn’t say this? I’ve been quite clear that while I think Brown is the catalyst of Labour’s issues, it’s the party as well that are stuck with their issues, and changing the leader without wholesale reform won’t endear the public to them any more.

Mr Eugenides had a good post on this (really, I promise). Major alterations of policy and leadership are all that could save Labour, because – let’s face it – there is little hope for positive change in the economy. On the other hand, if Gordon Brown were to be removed there’s no guarantee that there would be favourable reactions – “Labour descends into farce” n’ all.

“I am fed up with this macho male sexism of all calling people dear especially as I am a man.”

I know, but then you’re also a parodist, which is why I’m not inclined to take you seriously.

The party will just be lead by milliband there will be no wholesale reform just a change of leader and an equal defeat.

“1. Double first at uni”

Means nothing politically.

“2. Recovered from losing an eye- showing great mental steength”

Means nothing politically

“3. Spoke out against school bullying”

Who hasn’t?

“4. Longest lasting chancellor for more than 100 years”

During an unprecedented (in modern times) global economic boom, for which he took much of the credit while blaming it now for our woes.

“5. Recovered from losing a child – showing great mental strength”

Means nothing politically.

“8. Tax credits giving 1000s of £ to the poor”

As well as tax hikes taking hundreds if not thousands from the poor.

“10. Getting rid of Blair”

He personally did nothing of the sort.

BenSix What an insulting oaf. I am not a parodist. I mean my points seriously I throw in a few jokes but so what, that does not make me a parodist. What did I do to you? This is obviously an issue of I have a male brain and you have a female brain so you hate me. I will not be bowed by a bully like you.

Lee Griffin I nottice you have no reply for points 6, 7, and 9. Hmmmm important that isn’t it. and he did get rid of Blair, you know it. We all know it and it was revenge for Blair getting his spin doctors to call him gay and mad.
Also my point 1 is important as it shows his extreme high intelligence. He is the most intelligent leader since WW2. He may not charm buit he can walk the walk.

Sunny,

If this state of affair continues, Boris will develop a reputation for incompetence he’ll find very hard to shake off. There’s also little doubt that Boris’s dismissal of Cameron’s “broken society” narrative will annoy the hell out of the latter.

I think that, if Boris has a quiet few months, the Press will put the recent confusion down to him ‘easing into the job’. He may have more difficulty with the London Assembly and City Hall officials, who doubtless have a clearer perception of the cause of the effects.

DES

“BenSix What an insulting oaf. I am not a parodist. I mean my points seriously I throw in a few jokes but so what, that does not make me a parodist.”

Well, in that case I’m sorry from the heart of my female brain.

BEN six OK then i accept your apology.

Lee,
when you’ve found a weakness in your opponents armoury you’ve got to keep hammering it home to your advantage. I though you eased off, that’s all.

Dirty Euro,
6 – non-essential aid has been a hinderance to reform, development and transformation in so many cases that it is arguable whether it has been more harmful than helpful. Aid and corruption go hand-in-hand.
7 – the minimum wage was a short-term gain. Inflation has wiped out the real benefits, while the lax regulatory framework has lead to the growth of the grey economy where the law is effectively by-passed and the minimum wage is undercut, which leaves many in a state of limbo, angry that their expectations have been unrealistically raised beyond any attainment.
9 – inequality has grown faster under Brown than Thatcher. The manipulation of the official statistics have obscured the areas which have fallen back in real and relative terms and made it harder to identify or address these problems, leading to social contagion and a confusing malaise of political opposition. It appears that everything is better in all areas, but…

thomas
6. Rubbish the auid money has helped solve poverty issues. It is lazy and easy to say lets not give them oney. So people dying of aids and famines in your view are hindered by aid money and development project ideas.
7. Nope major inflation has onmly happened in the last year noting to do with the government or mini wage.
9. No it has not it depends on what figures you use. If you tory lies then you are right.

“If this state of affair continues, Boris will develop a reputation for incompetence he’ll find very hard to shake off”.

But you dont’ mean to say that he had a reputation for competence, do you?

I would love for the Boris chaos counter story to take off beieve me, but I’m not sure that it will.

1) I think Boris has a brand that is quite seperate to the Conservative brand and that fact, was part of the Tory fall back. So, they put loads of HQ people in to look after him and if that doesn’t work they just deny he’s anything to do with him. If Boris really does develop a reputation for incometence or chaos then the Tory brand is far enough away to get contaminated by him.

2) There has always been somethnig a bit chaotic about Boris and I think people voted for him in spite of that. I don’t think people care enough about City Hall and the GLA to get too upset with this very entertaining character to punish him too bad. I mean noby really thought he was competant, did they???

Plus, can someone tell me how to get my quotes in nice neat boxes like you lot do?

Hi Jo, we’ll have to see whether the fallout will continue. I hope it does. Boris never did have a reputation as you said, but then he never had to run anything big before either, to test that reputation.

You should not go just because the media are attacking you. You need strong leaders who can stand media pressure it is the same in soccer or sport.

Except that the media narrative is backed up by polling – showing Labour is doing terrible and so is the PM himself. That narrative is set. He needs to go, no doubt about it.

“Lee Griffin I nottice you have no reply for points 6, 7, and 9.”

I didn’t bother because while I have my suspicions about just how much Brown has to do with them, I am not fully versed to argue about them. I assumed (correctly) others would pick up on them if they were as poor a set of points as I thought.

“7. Nope major inflation has onmly happened in the last year noting to do with the government or mini wage.”

Inflation that Brown used (and he changed which figure was used) have been “low”, but that doesn’t mean inflation has been low. It’s also worth noting that inflation figures are disproportionately false to the poorer in society. Those of us that can afford to buy consumer electronics and luxuries are probably seeing that rough level of inflation, poor people only buying food and fuel are seeing (and have consistently seen in at least the last 5-6 years) high inflation in their purchases, essential purchases.

Sunny Hundal in that case thatcher should have gone in 81 bush senior should never have stood to be president clinton shoukd have gone in mid term you cannot just resign when you face a few bad months or even a year of bad surveys any other leader would face the same issues. These are just mid term blues or every leader will face these issues. See in years time.
Lee Griffin
We all know high inflation affects the poor but it is still not the pm fault iT is gloabl issues to do with food and oil. Saying the same sentence in different order does not alter the fact.

There is doubt about whether the PM should go there is no evidence opinion survey evidence the party would improve in the surveys if we changed the leader. You cannot use opinion surveys to change the leader to a leader who opinion surveys do not back. There is no point. What would Milliband do that is different nothing. If anyting he would be more right wing.

“Plus, can someone tell me how to get my quotes in nice neat boxes like you lot do?”

- Put

before the quote (then take out the spaces between blockquote and the arrows.

- Put

at the end of the quote (then take out the spaces between the /blockquote and the arrows)

Ben

Wow, that failed spectacularly. Second attempt.

Type blockquote before and after the quote, and then put after the e. On the latter blockquote, put a / after the < and before the b.

Ben

“We all know high inflation affects the poor but it is still not the pm fault iT is gloabl issues to do with food and oil. Saying the same sentence in different order does not alter the fact.”

But Brown actively ignored the inflationary issues…put them to one side because he would rather have kept inflation “at 2%”. He for years, along with Darling after him, has made it priority number one to confuse the public and disguise the figures from us so that Labour can appear to be economically more competent than we were.

Now that he can’t hide it, it’s suddenly all the global economies fault, it’s just a very shifty way of operating an economy by anyone’s books.

Lee Griffin Rubbish inflation has gone up because of fuel and food prices it is nothing to do with confusuion.
One minute you say the economy went well but it not the Pms fault next you say all economy problmes are the pm’s so when it goes well it is not his fault i when it goes well it is, faults tjhen you say the economy has beeing doing terrile and it is his fault but he has been confusing us.

Youre confusing me Lee So which is it.
Has the economy done well for the last 11 years or badly. Which is it. And whose fault or blame is that. You seem to change your argument for every crude point.

We need to stick with our leader there is no evidence that the party would get a boost from a new leader. Plus it would just decrease the one advanatge that we are the party of government, of experienced leaders, miliband may take over + inheirt a recession which he would get all the blame for + not have 11 years of good stuff to fall back on. Changing the leader is not right. We must be loyal and stand up for the leader.
I believe people will grow tired of the columbian charlies running the tories. :

I think the real significance of Parker’s resignation is the role of Sir Simon Milton, who is as adept a politician as they come.

He’s pretty close to being my least unfavourite Tory – he did a good job here in Westminster City (name one scandal that hit the City Council during his term as Leader) and I think the Labour and Lib Dem reps at the ALG would give him high marks too.

It’s always been pretty obvious that Cameron wanted him at City Hall to save Boris from himself. If you think of Boris as Kaiser Wilhelm I and Sir Simon as Bismarck you get the general picture. Why didn’t he run for Mayor of London himself, you may ask. Well, he’s about 5 foot 4 and that doesn’t play too well these days – there’s no lobby shouting for the interests of vertically challenged males…

More generally, this kind of problem is built in to the structure of the Mayoralty. There is probably a case for electing a Deputy Mayor – the Yanks don’t say, we’ll choose a President and let him/her appoint a Veep afterwards…

Dirty. The economy has done well, and this is little to do with how we’re governed. However while it was going well inflation was on the up, and Brown hid these figures purposefully to make the economy seem better than it was. This of course caused a problem when the economy was actually getting bad and he was still sitting there saying “we’ve kept to all our rules”. All in all his actions have disproportionately left the poor in the shit after his reign was over, all of his initiatives have bar tuition fee’s

Rubbish the mni wage helped so did aid to africa.

Dirty Euro:

During a period of sustained global growth Gordon Brown claimed credit for the economy. Now the global conditions have changed he must also take the blame for the state the economy is in. Public debt is spiralling out of control without even mentioning the billions hidden in PFI’s. For the first two years as chancellor he actually made a reasonable (clunking) fist of it. Since then he has been an absolute disaster and the chickens are coming home to roost.

As others have said though, it is the entire labour brand that is seen as toxic. A change of leader will not make an iota of difference.

I for one cannot wait to see this government consigned to the dustbin of history.

“As others have said though, it is the entire labour brand that is seen as toxic. A change of leader will not make an iota of difference.”

The party can cleanse itself, it can reform, it can come up with a new direction. The leader can not, the mere act of changing direction will be seen as weakness and will in turn weaken him further. Changing leader on it’s own may not make any difference, this is true, but without getting rid of the leader then changing your spots can’t make any difference.

Changing leader would be seen as the final meltdown of a party that has long passed its ’sell by’ date. Whilst there is no constitutional requirement for a new leader to go to the country before the full term, the public outcry against another unelected leader would be deafening. Furthermore can anyone see Brown going without a fight and how damaging would that prove?

It really isn’t about whether Labour finds itself in opposition, just about how soon and for how long.

“If this state of affair continues, Boris will develop a reputation for incompetence he’ll find very hard to shake off.”

I can’t believe you wrote this. Boris already has a reputation for incompetence. Have you not seen him being sent by his party to various parts of the UK to apologise for some gaff or another?

I saw Richard Madeley had him on Richard and Judy the other day. Richard started by saying “I voted for you because I thought it would be a laugh”

Tory central office are shiting themselves over Boris. But I don’t think they need to worry, Boris is seen as a national joke, who will be just one of those people who gets away with it. People even voted for him because he is useless.

“Changing leader would be seen as the final meltdown of a party that has long passed its ’sell by’ date. ”

I never subscribe to this absolutely baseless view. The media tried to spin back in the day that the Tories were in melt down in choosing Cameron, similarly things of this sort were said about Clegg. Cameron has gone on to be possibly the most likely PM after 2010, and Clegg has undone the woes of the last 12-18 months, now while the jury is still out on Clegg, not one person believes the Tory decision was a bad one for the party (as it see’s itself).

If Brown is removed to make way for someone else of course people will capitalise in the short term. But if the policies are good and the direction is better then in 2 years time people will have forgotten that Labour was in melt-down and scrabbling for a win.

Is this just a thread with 50 odd comments going nowhere? Is there nothing positive to say?

Sunny: “Right now, I’d argue New Labour needs to decontaminate itself first before it starts chucking mud at Cameron.”

But let’s not forget about how the right feels about Cameron. Jeff Randall at the Telegraph wrote that he would not trust Cameron with his daughter’s pocket money. The Sun’s business editor merely regarded him as a “poisonous, slippery individual”. This is all good ammunition for the Lib Dems, even if Labour feel unable to fire the bullets.

maas101 @ 48 – yes possibly, I think the outcry about another elected leader would be pretty loud. But then many may want him to go anyway.
And you’re right about when it will happen and or how long. This is why I’m not too bothered about Labour winning the next election anyway – its a foregone conclusion.

Charlieman:
This is all good ammunition for the Lib Dems, even if Labour feel unable to fire the bullets.

True – but have you ever seen the Libdem hierarchy attack Tories? Its usually embarassing to watch. They barely raised a squeak against them when they were essentially in agreement with Labour over Russia/Georgia.

Dirty Euro,

You are indeed tight that the economy did do whell for a while under Browns stewardship, but not as well as it should have done under the circumstances. The early gains may have been partly due to some of his reforms, but at the same time this concealed the problems that were built into the longer term.

Because Brown oversold his successes (which were not all down to his actions) and undersold any failures he built up a false picture of his economic prowess, thus by taking too much credit in the good times to build up his political capital he has left himself unable to repay the interest now that the economic tide has turned, leaving additional questions swirling around his judgement which he cannot dispel.

It is a paradox of politics that in advancing his cause he has backed himself and his party into a corner, where the problems cannot be solved without admitting his mistakes – so either he will be voted out because people are angry at the problems or he will be voted out because he decieved us. The Labour party can decide either to retain him because they believe we will forgive the mistakes in the hope he can rectify them or they can retain him because they can’t stomach the damage it will cause to their position by admitting they got anything wrong (even if it means they continue with policies which will make the problems worse).

It is typical problem which must be faced when circumstances change.

Just as with Boris Johnson, whose claims that Livingstone were the worst thing to happen to London since the discovery of gin are seen to be less than wholly accurate, politicians often find it difficult to adapt from proselytising their political platform to delivering effective policies once they attain office because the dynamics change.

You seem to take the simplistic view that politics is just a matter of right and wrong.

To provide aid alone is not enough – Zimbabwe has seen a drastic reduction in food production and the devaluation of it’s currency has left it unable to buy food from abroad, but do you seriously suggest that it is a good idea to hand over large amounts of humanitarian aid to Mugabe so he can continue his repressive and inefficient policy of land reform by feeding the army?

If aid doesn’t get to the people who need it then it doesn’t help them. If it is distributed to the people who have caused the problems then it can accentuate the problems. If it is the wrong kind of aid then the problems remain unsolved. If aid is provided in disproportion to the needs it can upset the system of economic provision (be it market of command economy etc) it can create new problems unrelated to the starting position.

Furthermore the conditionality of aid provision is often used as a political tool for furthering different political ends (Belgium has been criticised for tying debt-relief to economic development contracts, the US is criticised for using it as ’soft’ power to influence diplomatic relations) which fail to address the underlying political, social and economic problems which any country may be experiencing.

The best way to solve African problems is to introduce better governance structures which disincentivise informal practises (such as bribery and piracy) to build up the internal tax base, which can only be done by making processes more transparent and which encourages participation.

The minimum wage is a similarly problematic subject, because its implementation must be adjudged within the context of the overall performance of the wider economy. So for a short period it did indeed advance the cause of the low-paid, but at the same time it raised an economic barrier to employment for those without valuable skills. As increases in the minimum wage have failed to keep up with the level of inflationary increases in the cost of living this barrier could be seen to have reduced, but while efforts to retrain the low-skilled haven’t taken up the slack and have even gone into reverse in some areas the barrier has actually increased and a growing underclass has developed.

There are some good things which can be said of both policies, but because of the way in which they were done the gains have been more than offset by the losses because the level of effective administrative control has not adapted in line with the changing needs, and the situation worsens as more reforms mean the adaption lag increases.

Labour has tried to cross the river but has fallen into the quicksand, now the more it struggles the deeper they sink into the mire.

Getting back to Boris – I’m quite enjoying watching the split widen between him and the rest of the tories, because they can’t both be right and it opens up the questions of who is and of who represents the true face of Conservatism.

My feeling is that this dual position will split the Conservatives into the moderate centrists and the radical right-wingers in a way that Livingstone avoided damaging perceptions of the Labour party by winning initially as an independent.

The longer this goes on the deeper the divisions will be and the more it will destabilise the chances of the Conservatives either forming the next government or forming a coherent government in case it is victorious and wins an overall majority at the next election.

So my feeling is to give Boris all the encouragement we can in order to infuriate the backroom staff.

Phew! Sorry for all that.