That Girl from Derwent dwells on the value of religion this Christmas.
That Girl from Derwent has learned a few more things about prejudice since moving up North.
That Girl From Derwent reckons if you're going to be offensive, you should find a better reason.
That Girl from Derwent considers why it is that some words have wider implications than others.
In 1982, The Clash summed up Gordon Brown’s current situation perfectly in their hit 'Should I stay or should I go'. One side of Brown’s party is calling for him to step down from his position as leader, while the other side is staying loyal to their Premier. The anti-Brown elements of the Labour party have quietened down in recent days, with Brown having asserted his authority with an impressive display of leadership, stopping the rebellion in its tracks. Brown caught the rebels off guard, which was instrumental in saving his premiership from succumbing to a backbench rebellion.
“If I go, there will be trouble” is a very accurate statement. If Brown goes, the Labour Party will be thrown into internal chaos, just days or weeks after Brown has started to restore order. The leader of a party is the figurehead, the person who represents the party to the people. If the party is seen as a squabbling mess which is unable to sort its internal problems out, the votes for the general election will most likely resemble those of the EU elections and provide the party with their most humiliating defeat for decades.
Gordon Brown is there to stay; he is not the kind of leader to quit when he believes what he is doing is in the best interests of the party. Therefore, the only feasible way to hold a new leadership election is for a backbench rebellion to be launched again and to be successful. The public need to have confidence in the party. If party MPs are seen as not having confidence in the leadership so close to the general election, that hardly inspires the public, the voters, to have confidence in the party. A fully fledged and successful backbench rebellion is a bloody affair whenever it occurs, but it promises to be particularly brutal if it were to happen so close to this general election.
But, surely, a well respected, well known and well liked politician could take Brown’s place and rally the party, if Brown were to step down or be forced out? If a new leader were to be elected, they would most likely have to call a general election sooner rather than later, which would be a disaster for the party, judging by the recent EU and local election results. More importantly, who would choose to stand as leader? Anyone with serious political ambitions would be committing political suicide by standing, knowing that they would most likely lose the election if it were called soon after the new leader was chosen. This would result in either having somebody chosen who the public does not know, which is not good for the party, or someone reluctantly taking over and the public feeling their reluctance, possibly reflecting that in their votes.
On the other hand, as The Clash said, if he stays will there really be double? Brown has shown assertiveness in recent days, quashing the backbench rebellion. However, there have also been cabinet resignations, with James Purnell, for example, trying to start a domino effect of cabinet minister resignations, an effect which never came. Hazel Blears, the former Communities Secretary and the person in charge of the local elections, resigned just one day before the election. If the bad results for Labour are being blamed on Brown and being used as an excuse for him to step down, the actions of Hazel Blears need to be given just as much weight in causing those results. Furthering the impression of a divided government immediately before an election can have no result other than reducing the number of votes that the party obtains.
Some resignation letters called for Brown to resign, while others still proclaimed support for the Prime Minister. Once the resignations are put into context, with the fact that many did not call for Brown’s resignation, in addition to the fact that the majority of Labour MPs and ministers still support Brown, his position does not look as dire as has been sensationally reported. David Cameron and Nick Clegg have feasted on the resignations and election results, which is to be expected. These debates and allegations have spurred Gordon Brown into taking action and rallying his party.
It is true that there were rebels and ministers who resigned in protest over Brown’s leadership, but these have been dealt with. Brown has regained the initiative within the party. Announcing the cabinet reshuffle the morning after the election results, thus pre-empting the small flurry of resignations, only helped reinforce his image as a strong and authoritative leader. The way he dealt with the Labour rebels can also be seen as a step in the right direction for him and the party. Presenting a united front to the general public is vital if Labour wants to regain its recently lost ground.
After the events of this week, Gordon Brown looks set to remain as the Prime Minister and leader of the Labour party, ready to fight in the next general election. Brown resigning or being forced out will create more problems than it solves, especially now that the rebellion has been stopped. He has also shown some glimmers of authority and leadership in recent days and has set the internal rift within the party on the road to recovery. If Labour fails to win the next general election, Brown’s fate is sealed. If Labour wins the next election, the public will have endorsed him and he will be set to steer the party into the election beyond.
Good piece - it looks likely that Gordon Brown will steer Labour to the next General Election and that they will lose, ousting him. Things can change, of course, but if there was a change in leadership and *they* lost, the Labour Party would be in much greater trouble. We'll just have to see how things go; there's still a chance that the misfortune of the last 6 months can reverse and bring about a close battle.
Interesting piece- obviously delivered from the political Left but I have to disagree on a few points. Firstly Brown did not quash the rebellion - Peter Mandelson did- and it doesn't represent "impressive leadership" only the mafia esque bullying that has characterised the whole of Brown's political career.
With Brown in charge the elections will be far worse than with say Alan Johnson at the helm. Brown has the lowest personal ratings since Neville Chamberlain and his persistence at the top elongates the image of division rather than solving the leadership question for good.
On a similar note the election results were not hugely affected by resignations as various polls had Labour polling in the late teens for weeks before any of it began. Brown is left as anything but a "strong and authoritative leader" as he lost either of those attributes a long time ago. Stuck with a Chancellor he doesn't want and constantly hampered by threats to his survival Brown is a fatally weak, and the Tories will get over a 100 majority if he stays in power.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report