Corbyn confirms
Posted on Wednesday 20 December, 2006
Filed Under Labour Left
Looks like Jeremy Corbyn (pictured) probably is going for the Labour number two job, if this story on Guardian Unlimited is anything to go by. Asked directly if he is considering standing, the Islington North MP answered:
“Nothing’s decided until the new year. But there needs to be an anti-war candidate.
“None of the existing ones are. Even [Peter] Hain and [Jon] Cruddas voted for the war.” …
Mr Corbyn – who is backing Mr McDonnell for the top job – refused to say whether the two men had spoken about a combined ticket, saying merely he had not spoken to the Hayes MP “for a couple of days”.
Unusually mealy-mouthed for Jeremy. But I think we can take that as a ‘yes’. By the way, help a Labour Party newbie here. The vote is by STV, right? So it makes sense to say ‘vote Corbyn, transfer to Cruddas’. Or no?
<<Go back
Comments
91 Responses to “Corbyn confirms”
I think having a campaign that will drag up the arguments over Iraq will be destructive and pointless. What needs top happen is that Labour learn from what’s happened. The person who is really culpabale is leaving soon and what needs to happen now is a reassessment of what the Labour Party is and where it is heading, not an exercise in taering itself apart. Corbyn mentions that Cruddas voted for the war, which is true, but Cruddas seems to be the only one who will inspire a genuine restructuring and refreshing of the Party, which will ensure the kind of elitist dictatorial nature of policy making goes, along with the fixed direction of New Labour. By doing this, it will ensure that catastrophic decisions, like the Iraq war, will not be taken again, in the fashion that it was.
Well, Cruddas does have some plus points and if someone like Jeremy had not emerged, I might have backed him.
The trouble is, he seems a bit of a careerist. Loyal enough Blairite when it suited his purposes, left of Brown now he wants to appeal to Labour’s union base.
And if he gets the job? Who’s to say? It’s whichever way the wind blows with that guy.
Having a brief look around the Labour blogosphere to look up reaction to Corbyn’s standing, I have been shocked by some of the virulent, condescending, almost furious reactions to his having the ‘audacity’ to put his name forward. Negative reactions compared to positive ones (or even neutral ones) seem to be 3:1 or more.
Is the Labour Party really that hollowed out nowadays, or is it just that Blairites/Brownites blog more?
Matt
“The person who is really culpabale is leaving soon”
I tfind this sort of stuff is really objectionable, Blair did not do it on his own – he had the backing of hosts of MPs, spin doctors et al – including every single one of the d-leadership contenders (before Corbyn)
There’s no evidence that Brown opposed the war, apart from hints put forward purely on the basis that it will be politically useful to distance the party that took us to war from the war itself, by leaving behind the leader as a scapegoat.
Sorry, someone remind me how Cruddas is left wing again? Or is this yet another one of those “oh he’s a really good bloke he is” moments where the left convinces itself to back someone who simply doesn’t merit it?
Actually Voltaires Priest, the reason some of us are backing Jon Cruddas is not because he’s a “good bloke” but because he’s the only candidate talking about rebuilding our party, getting back out into our communities and council estates and wanting to talk about the issues that matter to Labour – building more social housing, fighting the BNP, campaigning with the T & G for cleaners to receive a decent wage. When Corbyn or any of your other self indulgent Leftist types start talking about campaigning with demoralised members and telling hard working members how they have gone about increasing their CLP membership on a month by month basis – as Jon Cruddas has for the last 18 months – I will take them seriously. Until then, Jon Cruddas is the only game in town. I do hope you reconsider your current attitude towards Cruddas which is one of pure and utter ignorance.
I tend to agree with dave about Crudass’ careerism. I think i’d even vote for Hilary Benn or Hain ahead of him. Benns record at international development has been moderately impressive on issues such as privatisation conditionality. Whereas Hain has abolished Grammar Schools in northern ireland and at least muted changing the top rate of taxation. Very modest i know but still more than crudass has ever done! Until it suited him, of course
So what you mean Jo is, that you’re backing a man who has no meaningful track record as a left winger at any point in his parliamentary career, because he happens to be talking left now there’s an election on. But I’m the ignorant one, of course…
And BTW, if by “self indulgent leftists” you mean people with principles who acted on them by for instance voting against the Iraq War (unlike the “left winger” Cruddas), then for me that puts them ahead of the Cruddas’ of this world every time.
Frankly I’d rather vote for Hillary Benn than for Cruddas. His politics are virtually identical and at least he has a cool name.
And that’s why with members like you Labour will lose the next general election. I am not voting for Jon because he’s “left”, “fake left” or a “nice bloke”. I’m voting for him because he’s the only candidate that wants to get out on doorsteps and campaign to get our traditional support back. Show me what Benn looks like campaigning on a BNP infiltrated council estate out of his suit and I think about it!
In 1983 I campaigned for Hilary Benn.In those days,he was a Young Turk leftie, Ealing councillor and associate of the London Labour Briefing crowd.In short,a true Bennite. He may be a “Benn butnot a bennite” suit now but he still speaks out independently on issues like cluster bombs and writing off Third World debt. I believe he is also one of three Cabinet members who have tiold Blair they will walk if he tries to end the union link.
When we campaigned in ealing, we did plenty of doorstepping on council estates, H Benn also has about 40 years’experience in the Party. I’m not votingfor Cruddas because he lacks credibility as a left candidate, will vote first for Corbyn and then for Benn if JC doesn’t make second ballot.I think you’ll find many other older Party members will do the same.
I’m sorry, Susan, but I remain unconvinced. I have seen Hilary speak at 3 separate events since he launched his “unofficial” leadership bid. I didn’t hear the word “campaign” come out of his mouth once on any of those three occasions. I couldn’t give a monkeys about “left”, “hard left”, “soft left”, “fake left” but what I do know if that Jon Cruddas wants to rebuild local parties, regularise agency workers, press the government to build more social housing (not ALMOs), give local councils more respect and control, campaign for a living wage and – read the rest in his excellent pamphlet co-authored with John Harris. I, like most normal Labour party memebers I know, am more insterested in the actions candidates are taking and the policies they are proposing rather than some abstract intellectual debate about whether they are “left” enough. Yes, he voted for the war but at least he’s openly saying he made a mistake. Have you asked Hilary about the war lately? Have you asked Hilary his views on Trident? What Cruddas is proposing is left enough for most of the party – selecting the right candidate is about compromise. What exactly is Hilary proposing? I am yet about anything in his favour apart from “I’m a nice Bloke and my dad is Tony Benn”. The other members may be duped but let’s hope the rest of the party isn’t.
Jo;
No, it’s because of credulous members like you that the party is in the state that it’s in. The fact that you’ll start singing the praises of Cruddas for campaigning against a party (the BNP) who are his main electoral opponents, says a lot about what high standards you’re holding him to. What, you think all of the other candidates (including Harman and Hain) wouldn’t be as active against the BNP if they faced that sort of threat.
The fact that the BNP are Labour’s main electoral opponents in that area and other inner cities, says a lot about the state of naturally Labour-voting areas of the country such as those in B&D that have turned to the fascists. Not to mention how well they feel they’ve been served by a leadership that Cruddas supported, at least until very recently.
And then, I appreciate you may think this a minor matter of no consequence to building the par’ee, that narcissistic leftists like myself kind of have a problem with him for, you know, voting for the Iraq war. But of course never mind such trifling matters, he’s raised his CLP membership, right? What a top bloke.
BTW that second para should have finished with a question mark, not a full stop.
Got it in one. Jon has raised his CLP membership. The others haven’t.
Don’t know about the Labour leadership or how it is voted for, but here in Australia we use Single Transferrable Vote for most elections.
The biggest danger with your ’1′ Corbyn ’2′ Cruddas strategy is if Corbyn were to get MORE votes than Cruddas, and if Cruddas were then to be eliminated as the candidate with the lowest number of votes.
If that were to happen, those ’2′ votes for Cruddas would never be counted, as they would be locked up in Corbyn’s pile of votes until HE is eliminated.
Is it Optional Preferential (where you can fill in as many or as few boxes as you like) or Compulsory (where you have to fill in all boxes)?
There’s always the possibilty that Cruddas has actually genuinely swung to the left after his constituency experiences with the BNP. Maybe he’s realised how new labour have abandoned working class people in constituencies like dagenham? I’ll try to remain as cynical as i can on the matter though! Corbyn is my number 1 with my number 2 slot still up for grabs.
[Benns record at international development has been moderately impressive on issues such as privatisation conditionality.]
Benn’s record has been better than moderately impressive. People in the game really seriously rate him. He is one of the few parties respected by all sides of the Darfur dialogue and was the only OECD shareholder prepared to put Wolfowitz back in his box. To be honest, I think it would probably be for the best if he didn’t win, because, in something of a reversal of recieved wisdom, I care about Africa and regard the Labour Party as basically a lost cause.
Dsquared, as important as Africa is, Hilary is not the man to lead Labour’s campaign in the next general election. You’re right, he should stick to what he’s good at and let the person with the genuine hunger to rebuild our party and campaign for a historic fourth term – Jon Cruddas – get on with it.
I think that the point is that Corbyn will end up nicking MPs nominations from Cruddas, who has, incidently, publicly and earnestly U-turned on his Iraq vote – see http://compassyouth.blogspot.com for more.
Jo;
Firstly, what I think you meant to say was “Jon’s CLP membership has increased”, not “Jon has raised his CLP membership”. Unless there’s something I’ve missed, if you really believe that people in Barking and Dagenham are joining the Labour Party because of Jon Cruddas’ magnetic charisma, then you’re deluding yourself.
Secondly, if you think that an increasing CLP membership (in an area where the BNP are the main electoral challenge, and national anti-fascist groups are focussing their efforts to maximise support for other parties against the BNP), is a mark of leadership, then again you’re just sooo far wide of the mark…
An additional thought – if Cruddas really wanted to address the issue, he might want to publicly confront his support for a “Labour” government that has governed in such a right wing manner as to enable fascist scum like the BNP to challenge in his constituency by faking “left” colours.
If he did that, sincerely, then I might begin to consider his a worthwhile candidacy. Until then, he’s just another windbag making leftish noises to boost his candidacy, as far as I’m concerned.
Voltaires Priest, you can call Jon whatever you like. If he didn’t have so much support people like you wouldn’t be so obssessed with trying to bring him down. 2007 is going to be an excellent year for Jon Cruddas and our party.
Is Jo John Cruddas’s girlfriend or hoping for a job from him after he wins the election? I know how venial New Labour is these days.
The thought occurred to me after I posted the above last night, that Jo is probably a paid PR official. Labour do that sort of thing don’t they. Pretend to be regular guys and swim among the fishes of the electorate spreading their message. Incidentally, praise be to God that Our Great Leader Tony Blair and his family escaped serious injury and death when their plane overshot the runway at Miami Airport.
Very Very Sad.
Well someone’s doing his PR and doing it well. Check out this interview in Gay magazine the Pink Post I just stumbled across. http://www.3sixtymag.co.uk/uploaded_files/downloads/ThePinkNews%20Jan%2007.pdf The guy’s absolutely everywhere!
[let the person with the genuine hunger to rebuild our party and campaign for a historic fourth term - Jon Cruddas - get on with it]
see, this is why I would never join a political party of the modern kind. Listen to yourself. This is rubbish, and at some level, you must know it. You’re all full of “Cruddas Cruddas Cruddas he’s the best thing since sliced bread”. But if he loses, it will be “John Who?” and you will be happily telling us all how good Hilary Benn or Jeremy Corbyn or whoever wins is. Maybe once a year at some Labour Party function you’ll have a glass of sherry and say “you know I thought John Cruddas never got a fair go”, but otherwise you’ll be on-message with the new guy.
It is unlikely to be a coincidence that after ten years of “all working together” and “getting behind the right team to build the Labour Party”, your membership has halved. I notice that you’re also trying to convince people who have eyes in their head that the BNP are a significant electoral force in the UK; that’s more of the same. People are turned off electoral politics for a reason, and the attempt to turn it into something like supporting a football club is that reason.
What a relief that people like you won’t have a vote in the election contest. I should of known that you’re one of these people who loves moaning from the outside. With that in mind, I really can’t be arsed to debate this matter with you when you won’t even have a say. I am, however, fascinated why you’re so interested in an internal Labour party matter. The old saying put up or shut up comes to mind!
Sorry, this is the proper link:
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-3368.html
Naah, in fairness to her I don’t think Jo is a paid PR officer from the Cruddas campaign (well, not yet anyway). I just think she’s either being staggeringly naive in supporting someone whose “reform” credentials appear to have come from nowhere in the past few months, or else she’s talking him up in the hope of cashing in some banked favours later on. I presume the former.
Hahaha. This almost precisely replicates the conversation I had shortly before Christmas with one of the directors of a company whose shares I’d sold. I told him, as I’m telling you, that I get no pleasure in “moaning from the outside” – what I like is dealing with functional, well-managed organisations, and I tend to both complain and keep my chequebook in my pocket when faced with organisations which are neither.
You seem to be quite confused about the Labour Party’s constitution, by the way; I said that I was not and would not be a party member, not that I didn’t have a vote in the election contest. Your man John Cruddas has expressed quite strong views on this subject so perhaps you ought to be a bit more “arsed” to find out what you’re talking about before shooting your mouth off.
If Jon Cruddas is such a ‘left’ candidate, why does he decline to support John McDonnell? Harping on about his beliefs in social housing ring particularly false given his implicit support for Brown. He certainly appears to be putting his own career first.
And I repeat, I don’t care whether Jon is “soft” left, “hard” left, “centre” left or “fake” left. Why put people in boxes for the sake of it? If he’s offering up policies I agree with on housing, the labour market and reforming the party I will back him – whatever his title. And I also repeat, I really can’t understand why people who won’t get a vote in the election care so much!
Jo, you appear to believe that only Labour Party members “get a vote in the election”. This isn’t true.
Jo, my point is that he isn’t offering up these policies. If he believed in them & was therefore likely to stand by them surely he would support a leader with broadly the same viwes, not for example follow G Brown on social housing! P.S., he has explicitly positioned himself as the ‘left’ contender.
And how do you know who Jon’s supporting? When did he announce it?
As it happens Jo, several people in this discussion do have a vote in the election, as Labour Party members. As such, they’re legitimately entitled to ask such questions of someone who’s standing as a left-wing deputy leadership challenger, as they so wish. And his supporters/campaign staff should really be seeking to answer them, rather than trying to sound angry or dismissive by turns.
If you have a vote, fair enough, but if you don’t you have no right to criticise if you’re not prepared to get involved.
1. Anyone who is in favour of public funding of political parties surely does so on the premis that political parties are not purely private organisations but rather bodies of legitimate public interest. As a result, *of course* non-Labour Party members have a right to express an opinion on the leadership of the Labour Party. This is particularly the case since the Deputy Leader will presumably be given a senior Cabinet post, which means that he will be exercising political power over us lot.
2. However it was that John Cruddas built up his constituency labour party membership, and however much of an achievement that was, I very much doubt that the main element in his success was a policy of telling people who weren’t party members to get stuffed. It is official Labour Party policy to encourage non members to take an interest in the affairs of the Labour Party – Hazel Blears very kindly spams me with a few email messages a week reminding me of this fact, due to my failure to tick some box or other.
3, and most importantly. It is not just Labour Party members who have a vote in leadership and deputy leadership elections. One of the few points on which John Cruddas has expressed a definite and specific view is that he is in favour of retaining the electoral college.
Like the vote, those whose only desire is to criticise instead of getting properly involved have no right to have their voices heard.
Shorter Jo:
“Lalala, lalala, I’m not listening!”
This is great. People who don’t know how to respond in an argument attempting to bully those who do. And a happy new year to you too!
Spoken like an infants’ school teacher. If you don’t regard the current state of something as acceptable, then criticising it is the only possible form of involvement. Are you really so very happy with the place that ignoring criticism has brought the Labour Party to? I’ll be supporting Corbyn and McDonnell on principle – not because I have any particular knowledge of their policies, but because they are at least on the face of it standing for things that they believe in, they’re not careerists and if they end up being drummed out of the Labour Party, we really will have an American two-conservative-party system.
The point is that you have to be in it to win it. There is no point jumping up and down moaning about how awful the Labour party/ government is if you’re not prepared to join it, take it over and mould it into your own vision. You really have no right to criticise others (including Jon Cruddas) who are attempting to do this. Pick up a membership card and people like me may take your “criticism” more seriously.
People who don’t know how to respond in an argument attempting to bully those who do.
Not sure what or who you’re referring to, considering that my comment on your debating style was my first on this thread.
But I have to say that your position -
There is no point jumping up and down moaning about how awful the Labour party/ government is if you’re not prepared to join it, take it over and mould it into your own vision.
- is really bizarre, as you’ll see if you apply the same logic to criticisms of the Conservative Party, the Catholic Church, the state of Israel or RESPECT. (All of which it would be entirely possible for any of us to join, etc.)
And if I were on the right and wished to share my views I would join the Tories to have my say, and if I thought I believed in God and wished to say my views on how he should worshipped I would join a church to have my say, and if I supported Israel and wished to share my views on how to maximise Isarel’s support I would join a UK based Zionist group to have my say and if I thought that I had views I wished to share to share on whatever hard left/ quasi religious “principles” “RESPECT” believed in I would join RESPECT to have my say.
Is Jo Jo Moore, well known ex-Labour spindoctor? I heard she had given up working for Labour and had retrained as an infant school teacher. She hasn’t changed her politics obviously.
Tee hee hee. I’m definitely going to start visiting this site more often.
No, she isn’t Jo Moore. At least, if William Hill are offering odds, that would be my bet.
However Jo, you do sound really, really arrogant, which possibly explains the mix-up. In the first instance, as I said before (and you accepted), several people in this discussion do have votes – although I fail to see how your attitude to their opinions would differ regardless of whether or not that’s the case. You think they’re nutjob left wingers (for insisting that a supposed candidate of the left actually be left wing?) in any case, presumably? Or else what, you think they’re automatically less quixotic if they’ve forked out their 36 quid?
In broader terms, it is simply a joke for someone who claims to represent the mainstream of the party which still claims to represent the interests of the bulk of UK working people, to say (I paraphrase, if you’ll indulge) that “if you haven’t got a party card you can’t comment on who should be Labour deputy leader, so fuck off”. That really isn’t the inclusive attitude that even newly-leftish Jon claims to stand for, now is it?