I take it Tim isn't too familiar with the alternative to Labour in most areas.Why should people, most of whom couldn't give a toss about Blair, be landed with tosspots like the BNP,UKIP and the Lib Dems at the expense of good,hard working Labour Councillors?
Gesture politics is great unless you actually need good local representation.
I think he is actually. He is just labouring (oops) under the misapprehension that a Labour defeat means Blair will go. Whereas, in reality, I don't think TB cares too much who runs Councils anyway. Also, a lot of people think if party members shout boo loud enough their leader will just go away, but it don't work like that. Then there is the 'road rage' factor... if he won't go, I'll 'ave you.
However, Elephunt, it's easy to run away with the notion that more than a handful of people read anything that any of us say on blogs and we can change the world... ah that it were so.
Before he does any more damage to your electoral prospects and those of every other Labour candidate in this year's local government elections in England, Bloggerheads aka Tim Ireland would do well to read:
http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/ea...3A54%3A24%
3A053
Seems a very unlikely forecast to me... and coming from Draper I would give it even less credence. I suspect a scenario whereby Blair continued in this way would be likely to inflame Tim rather than pacify him. I repeat, there is a danger of glancing down a few blogsites and thinking they will have a major impact on voting, or confusing that with voting intentions in the population as a whole. Just look at the Bloggers4Labour roll. Don't worry, be happy.
I know this is falling on deaf ears, Bob, but I'll try again anyway: We won't be losing (many) votes because of Tim's blog or his or anyone else's anyone-but-Labour campaign, or anything at all to do with Iraq. We'll be losing votes because this government keeps jacking up the rent on council houses, selling-off hospitals (and now schools), and generally behaving like a bunch of sodding Tories; and because voters don't believe a Labour council is willing or able to stand up to a New Labour government. They don't believe a Labour council can or would even try to stop stock transfer, or local hospitals and schools being sold off (partially or fully), or central government doing anything it wants to do - and they don't like what central government is doing.
I don't know whether Blair going would change the government's programme or the alter the current one-way relationship that exists between Labour in Westminster and Labour councils. But I think it's possible, and I know most people would give Labour another go locally if there was a change nationally. I think Brown is more of a pragmatist and less likely to stick to unpopular, costly, ideological policies like Foundation Hospitals; Labour would be more open under him, less caught-up in the failed Conservative dogmas of the 1980s. I could be wrong but, in terms of this election, the mere possibilities raised by Brown replacing Blair right now, would save Labour from a crushing defeat.
As at the last two general elections, Labour voters won't be voting Tory, or Lib Dem, or BNP; but they won't be voting Labour either - they just won't be voting. That's Blair, and it certainly isn't going to change whilst he's leader.
It's always worth remembering that less than 2% of the population reads the Guardian or Independent but more than 50% probably reads the local paper (no one reads blogs, not even Tim's!).
And if Mr Blair went less than a year after being elected on the promise of serving a full time, just think what sport the opposition and their friends in the press would have with his 'unelected' successor.......
Good luck in Bearwood, I'll need a miracle in Benhall!
Reading through these comments, it would appear that I present no risk unless a perceived risk suits a pro-Labour argument.
(PS - Don't worry about little old me... worry about the bloody big wave I'm riding in on.)
Gregg, lots of Labour councils can and have resisted housing stock transfer, (and believe it or not, even some Tory and Lib Dem Councils... Birmingham, for instance). We don't have any hospitals to sell, and I've not heard of selling off schools either. Are you seriously telling me Brown would be less likely to have Foundation Hospitals? It is a Treasury model, and like PFI the civil service would bump it through any government on the basis of keeping down public sector borrowing - the dreaded PSBR as it used to be called. I think you're right about the level of abstentions, and I agree they will continue to be disillusioned and stay away... in other words there's not much prospect of them being 'Anyone but Labour' either.
Tim... you might have a wave, but in comparison Blair's riding a Tsunami. Don't imagine I disagree with you on Blair... but voting Tory, not while there's breath left in my body.
I don't think Blair is going to go unless he is dragged out of Downing Street in handcuffs. He is a crimina. And a fascist and a traitor.
"worry about the bloody big wave I'm riding in on" - dream on Tim, dream on but try not to snore........
Gregg, lots of Labour councils can and have resisted housing stock transfer, (and believe it or not, even some Tory and Lib Dem Councils... Birmingham, for instance).
Yes, but an increasing number of people don't believe that they will - people don't believe Labour locally will fight Labour nationally. And in my area, more often than not, they won't. Personally, I find myself in a very bad position - I live in a borough where a Labour council meekly accepted stock transfer, and work in a borough where a Tory council fought and won.
We don't have any hospitals to sell, and I've not heard of selling off schools either.
You're unaware of what's been going on in, for instance, Hackney? I'm given to understand Birmingham City Council plans to hand seven schools over to the private sector - you must have heard about that.
Maybe sell-off isn't the right word - as with the railways, we're paying the private sector to take-over (and the results will be as disastrous).
Are you seriously telling me Brown would be less likely to have Foundation Hospitals?
I think he'd be open to considering not having them, in a way Blair isn't and never will be. Contrary to his own self image, Blair is an ideologue, a true believer in Thatcherism. He won't compromise, no matter how many times that ideology is tried and fails, no matter how disastrous the consequences. Brown seems, to me, to be more pragmatic.
It is a Treasury model, and like PFI the civil service would bump it through any government on the basis of keeping down public sector borrowing - the dreaded PSBR as it used to be called.
If the campaign to force the Treasury to take PFI debt into account when measuring public borrowing is successful, that incentive will disappear.
Gregg, you're confusing me. If 'people' believe Labour councils will sell off their houses, even though loads of them don't, perhaps its because you keep telling 'people' that they are, even when they are not. I'm not aware of what the Tory Lib Dem coalition is doping with schools, but if it is as bad as you say, why is Tim advising people to vote for them? You are just wrong about Brown and the PFI/Foundation argument. It is treasury driven, not political or ideological, so of course its his argument. Don't get me wrong, I'd get rid of Blair tomorrow, but don't fool yourself that voting Tory or waiting for Gordon on his white charger will make everything OK.
Mr papps seems to fail to understand the police/state/government relationship.
Bob, can you point me to where "Tim advises people to vote fascist"? No?
Very New Labour that smear.
Bloody hell, Justin... take a look at what I just posted not 2 minutes ago (after quietly fuming for about 18 hours):
http://www.bloggerheads.com/
arch...step_carefu.asp
We should get married and make babies, mate.
(looks at comment timestamp)
(looks at watch)
Ah. best make that 'look at the post I *started on* 2 minutes after you made this comment'... it looks slightly less magical now, but I still want to make babies with you. Name the time and place.
... And Tim's wave washes up more and more people...
I was a Labour member once. Not any longer. And like Tim, I have to question the assumption that the electoral choice is a Boolean Labour *or* 'fascist'. The electorate is not that thick.
I agree. OK, I agree. I wasn't actually trying to say Tim advises anyone to vote fascist. I accept that is how it came out though, so I apologise. What I really meant to say was that 'anyone but Labour' can be interpreted as advising people to vote BNP where they may be the biggest threat to Labour, as they are in many of the West Midlands Wards. it came out wrong, sorry Tim, I'm absolutely sure you would qualify the 'anyone' to exclude fascists. Not sure everyone would.. or that the electorate would think through the sophistication of the message.
Hi Bob,
I think the Blair clique have hijacked the Labour Party, he gets his advice and funding from outside the party, which he regards as an inconvenience at best.
But you and your fellow members actually pay to belong to the party and, although you may feel proud of removing dog dirt, I feel that the more important issues of international law, foreign policy, PFI, rendition,public corruption etc mean that I just can't support the party.
Your defence of 'vote for us because the others are awful' is hardly a vote winner for me.
I also am unable to support a party that has ripped up as many civil liberties as Blair has done and I just will not support a party that is introducing what we call Blair's Enabling Act. It's frightening.
When I look at the Labour apologists and see them cry, 'but I don't support Blair or his policies', but they just don't do a damn thing about it. I regard that as political cowardice.
Many Labour Party members remind me of battered wives, suffering constant abuse and humiliation but clinging on in the hope that they, despite all the evidence, can change their partner's behavoiur and living on the memories of better days in the dim, distant past.
There are few tools for those of us who want a more representative and democratic government that Labour, but one tool we have is just not to vote for your sorry party.
A lot of people would have more respect for people you, Bob, if you went along to the Labour Party conference as is your right and shouted "Nonsense" at Jack Straw. Not only did Benito Mussolini make the trains run on time, he probably got the dogshit cleaned off the streets of Rome. Isn't it good to be part of a party who effectively appoints their leader for life and doesn't have an election in 12 years?
... and Mr Quarsan and goatchurch do... errm, what precisely? I saw no Mr goatchurche escorted from the Conference. As I say... I admire Tim, and even UKIP DO something. Mr Goatchurch would have opposed Mussolini by... calling him names??? That would have worked wonders. Incidentally, Mr Quarsan, I don't recall ever going to the electorate and saying, vote for us, the others are awful. In fact, I have never even acknowledged, on any election material I have ever issued, that we even have any political opponents. That's their job, not mine. If you don't like the fact that the public are more concerned about their environment than ID cards, tough!
Bob, quick question; what does your hit counter say since Tim pointed the wave in your direction?
I do agree with you, completely, about the anti-BNP thing, given a straight Labour/BNP choice, I would vote for the slimiest NuLab stooge that existed. If I felt BNP were likely to win.
Hell, I voted for Ben Bradshaw once, he comes pretty close on the slimebucket scales.
I'm also not keen on mixing local and national; my local (LibDem) council, for example, is bloody awful, reminiscent of Militant Liverpool in the embarrasment stakes, if nowhere near as bad.
But, unfortunately, the media and political culture does mix local and national, the results will be seen as 'endorsements', etc. So, unfortunately, we have to mis the two.
I actually hope that you remain in office; blogging politicians are a good thing in my book, regardles of party. I just hope that you don't have many colleagues left.
MatGb, the hit counter has exploded and Statcounter didn't seem able to cope with the sudden rush yesterday. A mention by Tim is like getting the front page in the newspapers, even if the downside is all those people reading my grovelling apology for misquoting Tim. I think I've said before I have no problem with people saying 'Don't Vote Labour'... that's democracy, but unfortunately your original slogan was too catchy and there are still lots of people using it. Thanks for the nice thoughts, but I've got a life outside of the Council anyway... so I'll just post as ex-Councillor Bob Piper.
I agree with the comment that Blair does not care much about local government but he has to realise that, in his present predicament, he needs to avoid a disaster in the local elections. Losing a shed load of seats plus some key London boroughs would merely intensify the pressure and encourage the knife sharpeners to keep on sharpening.
"If you don't like the fact that the public are more concerned about their environment than ID cards, tough!"
How exactly are you planning to clamp down on irresponsible dog owners through the abuse of the centralised biometric database National Identity Register and ID Card scheme ?
If you do not understand that we want BOTH a clean environment AND the freedoms annd liberties which have been taken away by your Labour party,
then you are out of touch.
You miss the point. I am saying that generally the public (or the electorate if you want it put in crude political terms) just so happen to be more concerned about day-to-day dog shit issues than they are about ID cards, particularly in council elections... and if you cannot except that... tough, get another electorate!
Ah yes Bob, currently, you're right. Which is why we're working to inform the electorate in order that they're concerned about both.
Because the series of proposed fines for violations of aspects of the NIR are, quite simply, wrong. And once people start being hit by them, start receiving the threatening letters that are going to be sent (any constituents you have without a TV licence, look at the letters Capita sends; that's for £100, not £1000), then people will really care.
I agree. However, but for that to happen, even you are admitting, it will be too late. I'm talking about the current state of public consciousness, not some time in the future. If Labour take a hit in the local elections it might rebound on Blair, but as I say, there is no prospect of that happening in the run up to the election. I have already accepted that a vote for me will be interpreted as a vote for Blair, but forgive me if I don't ask people to vote for my Tory/Lib Dem opponents (the Tory is the more left wing, so I suppose I would have to choose him - uggh) just to give Blair a bloody nose.
what labour party?
cae2f7 eb9570d8ea
Commenting by HaloScan
