Summary: Labour Leadership Special

Firstly, we’d like to say a big thank you to Claire, Stacey, Liza, Philip and Nick for their contributions to our Labour Leadership Special this week. Their fascinating insight has provided a really valuable source of debate and discussion.

Here’s a quick summary of the points and issues raised in each discussion:

• The exchange on Ed Miliband focused on his personality and opinion was divided as to his ability to relate to individuals and the electorate as a whole. It was argued that, of all the candidates, Ed was most easily able to combine electability with progressive values. People seemed attracted to Ed’s campaign for a Living Wage and many felt Ed was the most likely to attract votes from disaffected Lib-Dems.
  
  
• There was a general consensus that Ed Balls was a bullish and dogged politician, but opinion was divided as to his appropriacy to lead the Labour Party. Throughout the debate there was a clear respect for Balls’ economic nous, but many thought his aggressive style and presentation skills could make him an electoral liability. Regardless of the outcome of the leadership election, it is clear that Balls has established himself as a big beast of the party and has no doubt carved out a niche for himself as the Shadow Chancellor.
  
  
• David Miliband inspired the most controversial analysis of all the candidates. There was little dispute over David’s political and rhetorical aptitude, but he certainly elicited the most vehement dissent. Opponents focussed on David’s close association with New Labour and, in particular, the Iraq war. Many Labour supporters are uneasy at the prospect of the former Foreign Secretary leading the party and suspect him of covering up state torture. Having said this, David enjoyed the fiercest rebuttal from his champions and definitely had the most advocates of all the candidates. There is certainly extensive support in favour of David Miliband, but his victory threatens to divide the party.
  
  
• Philip’s advocacy of Diane Abbott was much more focused on policy than any of the other candidates. This helped differentiate her from the other four who are all closely linked to New Labour. For this reason, Diane Abbott could easily be characterised as the ‘opposition’ candidate – but her presence on the ballot undoubtedly broadens the area of debate. Although identified most strongly as the left-wing candidate, there was persistent concern regarding Diane’s decision to send her son to public school.
  
  
• Andy Burnham didn’t arouse as much discussion and debate as the other candidates and perhaps this suggests he lacks the profile to lead the party. Andy has acknowledged himself that he hasn’t received the same media attention as his rivals, but is this because he’s lead an uninspired campaign or is it because the media has been seduced by the experience of the other candidates? In response Andy has forged a grassroots campaign. He is a loyal politician and has conducted a robust fight against the privatisation of the NHS. As demonstrated by Newsnight’s focus group yesterday, he evidently impresses in person and can easily relate to individuals.
  
  

As a whole, the leadership race has focused on personality rather than policy. There is very little to separate the candidates on what they believe and how they have voted in the past (with the exception of Diane Abbott). The campaign itself has been relatively amicable and the lack of disagreement makes it very hard to differentiate between the candidates. The cordial and fraternal hustings promote the perception of a united party, but it would have benefited from a more combative polemic. It could also breathe new energy into the party. All contenders have made it clear that they want to build a new party, but it’s still unclear what this new party would look like. Only time will tell.

Now we’ve heard about all five rivals, what order are you going to place the candidates? Those brave enough to say, post below!

Andy Burnham: Labour Leadership Special

Andy Burnham is the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and was previously a Special Adviser on Culture, Media and Sport. Andy is a big fan of Everton FC – although Liverpool legend Jamie Carragher has contributed to his campaign fund.

Andy is being support by Nick Smart:

I think it's fair to say that at the start of this campaign, Andy was written off as something of an outsider with little prospect of becoming the next Labour leader. Yet within the space of 3 months, this situation has been turned on its head, and he's now a serious contender for the job. Why? Because as people up and down the country have had an opportunity to meet Andy and listen to his message, they've all come away with a shared realisation - he understands what people's lives are like, and he's 'one of us'.

Unlike other candidates, Andy wasn't born into politics, and it's through his own personal experiences that he has first-hand knowledge of how difficult it can be for kids without connections to get on in life. It’s because of this that Andy is pushing for policies such as making it compulsory for organisations to advertise work placements and internships, as well as fighting for every child’s right to go to university or into vocational training.

On a wider scale, Andy wants to help regular people who play by the rules but feel let-down by Labour in recent years. His manifesto, ‘Aspirational Socialism’, sets out his plans for levelling the playing field through policies such as scrapping stamp duty, creating a National Care Service, and the introduction of a National Credit Union administered through the Post Office network. I would encourage everybody with a vote to take a look at this manifesto before casting their ballot.

Throughout the campaign, I've had the opportunity to meet other people who are backing Andy, and it's increasingly clear that he's drawing support from across all sides of the Labour Party. He's very much a unity candidate and I believe he has the necessary attributes to take the party forward and win back the 5 million disaffected voters we've lost since 1997. In Andy's own words, he's neither New Labour nor Old Labour, but True Labour.

Do you agree with Nick? Does Andy have the profile and personality to lead the Labour Party? Will his Northern heritage appeal to Middle England? And how serious are his socialist credentials? Let us know what you think below.

A Week of Guest Blogs: Labour Leadership Special

The Labour Party has not had an open and democratic leadership debate since 1994, but the current contest is seen as an opportunity for the Party to refresh its message, re-engage with grassroots and reach out to lost voters. Last Wednesday, ballot papers went out to all Labour Party members to cast their vote. But the largest leadership contest this country has ever seen won’t just be decided by Labour Party activists. The process itself involves Labour MPs, MEPs and councillors, grassroots activists, affiliated organisations, socialist societies and trade unions.

The outcome of the leadership contest will determine the future direction of the Labour Party. Will they lurch back to New Labour sectarianism or swing to the left? Either way, this is one of the most important political decisions of our time. Whoever wins could be Prime Minister within a year, or spend years in the political wilderness.

Eyes on Power is dedicating this week to discussing and debating the leadership election. Each day we’ll be looking at a different candidate and hearing from one of their ardent supporters. We won’t be providing analysis ourselves, but hope that it will inspire debate and provide further insight to floating voters. First up tomorrow is Ed Miliband.

Labour Leadership: A Lost Opportunity?

It is a sad indictment on the Labour Party - and our democracy as a whole - that John McDonnell has not made it onto the ballot to be party leader. John McDonnell's socialist disposition will never be popular with the establishment, it may never be popular with the electorate, and it may never be popular with the Labour Party, but the sad thing is we'll never know.

The Lib-Dems’ promiscuous flirtation with Labour before eventually bedding the Tories demonstrates that there is little difference between the leadership of all three parties. McDonnell's appearance on the ballot paper, however, would have shifted the whole area of debate. Excluding Diane Abbott, all the candidates are white, middle-class, Oxbridge educated men who've served as Special Advisors and supported the policies of New Labour. Is this inspiring? Is this going to attract a new generation to politics? And can they compete with their more experienced PR clones Cameron and Clegg?

Regardless of what you think of McDonnell’s politics, he is passionately principled and consistently champions those unable to represent themselves. He voted against his own government on the Iraq war, tuition fees and ID cards. In each of these cases, he represented a large majority of public opinion - opinion not reflected by the actions of parliament. Who will be the dissenting voice now? Who will listen to the people? Without John McDonnell’s voice in the leadership debate, the other candidates will go unchallenged, unchecked and the status quo will prevail. Democracy itself relies on debate and discussion from the widest possible field. By silencing a whole wing of its party through bureaucratic gerrymandering, Labour has denied its members a voice.

The Labour leadership contest will be conspicuous by John McDonnell’s absence, but at least the presence of Britain’s first black female MP shows Labour are more diverse than their rivals in the Commons. Will Diane Abbott succeed in shifting the field of debate, or will we be left with the same old New Labour?

Labour Leadership: A broad enough church?

The Labour Party is at a crux. Will a new leader invigorate the party and guide them to victory in the near future, or will they spend years in the wilderness hop-scotching between impotent leaders? Only time will tell.

What is clear, is that they have the opportunity to revitalise the party and re-engage, not just with lost Labour members, but with the electorate as a whole. Now that the Milibands and Ed Balls have secured their place on the ballot for Labour leader, they should each ensure that the other candidates – particularly John McDonnell – also get nominated.

All of the candidates claim to champion a re-engagement with the grassroots of the party – but this can only be achieved if all wings are represented in the leadership debate. Only by defeating challengers from each wing of the party can the eventual victor get the mandate necessary to lead the party and realign its direction. Therefore, undecided MPs should forgo career considerations by nominating one of the candidates not yet secured on the ballot paper – be that John McDonnell, Diane Abbott or Andy Burnham. The Labour Party is a broad church made up of social democrats, trade unionists, socialists and social minded liberals – all of whom deserve their voice heard. The Labour Party has the perfect opportunity to re-establish itself as the party of progress and social inclusion – but this can only be done with open and broad debate. By showcasing its diverse make-up, Labour can reengage with working people and contrast itself to the white, male-dominated Oxbridge elite of the ‘new’ coalition government. Whether Labour takes this opportunity might inform how long the party remains in the wilderness...