Labour Leadership race amid Blair-Brown clash & UKIP Leadership change & conference

[-:Undertaker:-]

Labour Party leadership and release of Blair book

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...rother-Ed.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...civil-war.html

Published on the day Labour members received their leadership ballot papers, the former prime minister's detailed and sustained criticism of Mr Brown in his memoir was greeted with dismay and astonishment by senior figures in the party. They said it risked reopening the wounds that scarred the New Labour era and could be "very, very damaging" as the party tried to move on from a general election defeat. Figures close to Mr Brown accused Mr Blair of being "delusional" and warned that the book could unleash a course of "mutual destruction" and dominate the current leadership election.

The row threatens to intensify the rift between the two front-runners for the leadership, the brothers David and Ed Miliband, who are widely seen to represent the Blairite and Brownite wings of the party. Mr Blair uses his memoir to give tacit support to David Miliband's candidacy and offers a scathing criticism of Ed Balls, another candidate and a close ally of Mr Brown. Mr Brown spent Wednesday at his Scottish home and is yet to respond to the accusations that he effectively sought to blackmail his predecessor. One former Cabinet minister has urged Mr Brown to write his own memoir to give his version of events. In A Journey, Mr Blair discloses how he always feared Mr Brown's premiership would be a "disaster" because of his successor's lack of political instinct and "emotional intelligence". He reveals dozens of rows and disagreements during which Mr Brown and his supporters sought to derail the New Labour project.

But Lord Prescott, the former deputy prime minister who often acted as a go-between between the two men, said the book presented a "one-sided version" of the relationship. He warned of the "real danger" of Labour drifting into the wilderness for years if the leadership contest descended into a civil war between Blairite and Brownite factions. "The dangers are – as we saw with the Tories [after 1997] – that if the divisions continue and there is a suggestion that one [candidate] won't follow if the other is elected, that would be very, very damaging for us," he said. "It damaged Labour for 18 years, it damaged the Tories for 13 years.

"We have a fight now between 'Is it Left, is it Right, is it New, is it Labour?' Forget all that. Let's all be Labour and get behind the new leader." Mr Balls has called for an end to the "recriminations". "Tony Blair was Labour's most successful prime minister and Gordon Brown the most successful chancellor," he said. "And for all the tensions, difficulties and arguments which undoubtedly happened, they achieved great things together." Mr Balls hit back at Mr Blair's claim that he was "anti-aspiration". He said Mr Blair did not "get it". He also dismissed the former prime minister's claim that he could have won a fourth term, adding: "Tony had become out of touch, I am afraid."

Andy Burnham, who is also running for the party leadership, said he was "saddened" that Mr Blair had chosen to publish his book at such an important time. He said the "battles of the past" should not enter into the election.
He said: "It really does sadden me that Tony has chosen this day to publish this book." Ed Miliband, who is caught in the crossfire between the Blair and Brown camps, also urged Labour to "move on" from the past.

The candidates up for the Leadership are; Diane Abbott, Andy Burnham, David Miliband, Ed Miliband and Ed Balls. The Leadership ballots have already been sent out to members and trade unionists and will be announced on the 25th September 2010 ahead of the Labour Party annual conference. The post of leader is occupied at the moment by interim Leader Harriet Harman following the resignation of Gordon Brown on 10th May 2010.

UKIP leadership change amid annual party conference

http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-n...interim-leader

Following the resignation of Lord Pearson of Rannoch as UKIP leader on the 17th August 2010, the NEC of the party has met during the annual party conference taking place now and has positioned former leader (of 2000-2002) Jeffrey Titford (also former UKIP MEP) as the interim leader who will take up the role until a new leader is elected by party members later this year in a fully-fledged election. The role he has taken on will be similar to the role we have seen Harriet Harman of Labour take following the resignation of Gordon Brown.

Vote Match: Labour Leadership

http://www.votematch.org.uk/lab2010/index.php

We haven't heard much on the Labour leadership (on this forum anyway) and Jordy found this vote match website you can use to see which of the candidates you are closest to in what they are proposing as policy. It only takes a few minutes and it'd be interesting more so to see what results Labour supporters on here come out with results-wise. The link is over the above photo, here are my results (as much as I disagree with them all [the candidates]);

Ed Balls: 59%
David Miliband: 57%
Ed Miliband: 57%
Diane Abbott: 49%
Andy Burnham: //not included in the questionare//

Thoughts on the Labour Leadership candidates? (would be interesting to hear thoughts of Labour supporters)

[Agnostic Bear]

Just as a thing do you absolutely have to inject something UKIP into every other post made about a party you disagree with? It wont win over any voters, be seen by any people or have any residing effect.

Why not switch to a good political party like the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats or the Labour party? I mean those that actually have a chance of influencing things or getting things done?

[Inseriousity.]

I think that's the problem with the voting system. People feel like they're wasting votes if they don't vote one of the mainstream 3 so switch their vote over to whichever is closest to their belief.

David Miliband - 65%
Diane Abbott - 55%
Ed Miliband - 53%
Ed Balls - 41%

They're my results. Hmmmmmm. Being apolitical, I haven't really been following the leadership race closely so not sure if this is a good thing or not. I think he looks too smug tbh

[-:Undertaker:-]

Just as a thing do you absolutely have to inject something UKIP into every other post made about a party you disagree with? It wont win over any voters, be seen by any people or have any residing effect.

Why not switch to a good political party like the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats or the Labour party? I mean those that actually have a chance of influencing things or getting things done?

I post a range of topics and ones that i'm interested in, infact just like alex posted the resignation of Lord Pearson (UKIP leader). Now I thought, should I just post UKIP or should I include another leadership election thats running at the same time, an election that nobody on here has bothered posting despite the fact there are a lot of Labour supporters on here - so I posted both just as I would post both if it were the Greens and the BNP, the Liberal Democrats and the Tories - whatever mix that happens to be on at that single time. So yes, the thread was for UKIP in the first place just I thought i'd include Labour seeing as they are a main party and it hasn't yet been discussed on here. happy with that explanation on why and how I post my threads sir?

I used to support the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats at one point, although I assume by 'good party' you mean because they are the 'main parties' and have good PR staff and spin doctors along with having extensive coverage by the biased BBC? because let's face it, the main parties (the Conservatives and Labour) agree on the following issues;

- European Union
Both parties agree with more and more European Union.

- Education
Both parties continue to uphold a education system which is not based on merit but house prices.

- Foreign affairs
Both parties continue to play poodle to the United States and be submissive to Brussels.

- Healthcare
Both parties continue to pour billions into the health system when in reality it is a bureaucratic mess.

- Armed forces
Both parties continue to chop away our armed forces which have served this country damn well.

- Welfare & Benefits
Both parties haven't a clue on the benefits system and it will continue to be abused, both say 'lets clean it up' but it is all a gimmick.

- Pensions
Both parties remain clueless on how to solve the disasterous pensions black hole that has arisen thanks to demographics and the Brown raid.

- Economy
Both parties pledged to cut, however whether the coalition will remains to be seen - even so, the cuts will still not go deep enough or in the right places.

- Civil Liberties
Both parties naturally claim to defend civil liberties yet consistently wear away our ancient rights whilst in government.

I mean I could go on and on and on and on and theres numerous issues I haven't even covered in those issues i've mentioned as i'd rather keep them as one-liners. If 'getting things done' means continous erosion of our civil liberties, submission to the European Union, higher and higher taxes to pay for a massive public sector + many more issues then more fool you for voting for tweddledumb or tweddledumber. I will give it to you though, you are right that they will all 'get things done' because all three parties (especially Labour and the Tories) are exactly the same so it really doesn't matter who you vote for as you are getting the same every single time.

Then there's the point that most of our laws and legislation are now made in Brussels anyway so in a way its pointless voting in the first place, even with the three useless clone parties. I support UKIP because I agree with them on most things - a lot of people obviously don't, but for gods sakes lets stop voting for the three main parties who are the exact same as one another and spit on us everytime they get into office. If you are a socialist fine, I may disagree with you but at least vote for a party which matches your views rather than the one the media tell you to vote/your parents tell you to vote.

You seem to think very highly of the main parties so I do expect a rattling defence posted back. As for UKIPs aim (to get this country out of the European Union) there is more than one way to achieve this aim rather than via Westminister as the short video below will explain (and i've also posted the national European Election 2009 results below the video);

European Election Results 2009 (proportional representation election)

Conservative Party 27.7%

UK Independence Party 16.5%

Labour Party 15.7%

Liberal Democrats 13.7%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2009_(United_Kingdom )

To vote for what you genuinely believe in is not a wasted vote.

[kk.]

David miliband is the only viable candidate if I'm honest. Balls is a ridiculous last name, and Ed looks weird. David seems like I could trust him. I can't imagine another woman prime minister for a while tbh.

[Hecktix]

Tony Blair's book is a bit of a joke really, I think it's showing his true colours, I never liked him and of course it is he who took us to war in Afghanistan & Iraq unnecessarily and his regime that led onto the recession (yes so what if GB was chancellor, he was following Blair's orders).

In terms of Labour leadership, I've not followed it too closely over the summer as I've had a lot to do but I have always preferred David Miliband over the other candidates, despite looking like a monkey he is the only one out of the candidates who I could see being PM, he has a really nice aura about him and I think under D Miliband the Labour Party would be rejuvenated.

Here are my results for that site thingy:

David Miliband - 62%
Ed Balls - 59%
Diane Abbott - 37%
Ed Miliband - 28%

[immense]

My results show me with Diane at top so not posting those. I want Ed Mililband to win anyway. He's old school baby.

[Ardemax]

yeah the ukip thing didn't really have to be included as the focus will mostly be on labour... but yeah
my results were like well close lol

dave milliband
67%
ed milliband
66%
ed balls
63%
diane abbott
40%

i don't mind who is the leader, just hoping everyone will give them a fair chance