UK

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 13° London Hi 14°C / Lo 8°C

Johnson would deny Tories outright victory

Exclusive: 'Independent' poll reveals that new leader could transform Labour's prospects

By Andrew Grice, Political Editor

Alan Johnson would deny David Cameron an overall majority at the next general election if Labour ditched Gordon Brown and installed him as prime minister, according to a new poll for The Independent.

The ComRes survey provides the first evidence that a change of leader could dramatically transform Labour's prospects. The findings were described as "stunning" by rebel Labour MPs last night. They believe it could influence Labour's agonised debate over whether it should back or sack the beleaguered Prime Minister.

Under Mr Brown's leadership, the Conservative Party would win an overall majority of 74, according to ComRes. But if Mr Johnson, the Home Secretary, replaced Mr Brown, the Tories would be six seats short of a majority in a hung parliament – raising the prospect of a deal between Labour and the Liberal Democrats to keep the Tories out. Mr Johnson is the only one of eight possible Labour leaders who could prevent an outright Tory victory. Under Jack Straw, David Miliband, Jon Cruddas, Ed Balls, Harriet Harman, James Purnell or Mr Brown, Mr Cameron would win a majority of between 10 and 94, ComRes found. Significantly, Labour would do better under Mr Straw, Mr Miliband, Mr Cruddas and Mr Balls than under Mr Brown.

Mr Johnson is also the most popular of the eight contenders among people who regard themselves as natural Labour supporters and among people who backed the party at the last general election. Charles Clarke, who called on the Prime Minister to stand down at a packed meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) last night, said of the ComRes survey: "This poll is the convincing evidence that Labour needs a serious and considered debate about its future direction and leadership."

Labour MPs recalled that similar polls, suggesting that a change of leader would revive Tory fortunes, contributed to Margaret Thatcher's ousting by her backbenchers and ministers in 1990. Mr Brown was cheered as he arrived at what had been billed as a meeting that could decide his fate. There was unusually candid criticism during the heated 90-minute session as three former ministers – Fiona McTaggart, Tom Harris and Mr Clarke – told him to his face the fact that he should stand down. Siobhain McDonagh, a former whip, also called on Mr Brown to go.

The Prime Minister won the backing of most of those present. Striking a note of humility, he told the meeting: "I have my strengths and I have my weaknesses. I know I do some things well and some things I don't do well. But I've learnt that I have to keep listening all the time."

Mr Brown promised to consult more widely inside his party, run a more collective leadership and to be more open and transparent in the way he ran Downing Street. He pledged to be a full-time Labour leader as well as a full-time Prime Minister.

Dismissing calls for his resignation, he said: "You solve the problem not by walking away but by facing it, doing something about it." He warned that previous Labour governments had been brought down by a combination of economic problems and party disunity. He insisted there were no huge ideological differences within the party, telling the meeting: "There isn't a resignation letter I have seen that mentions policy differences."

He insisted he was not begging for unity but was "making an argument for unity", adding: "I am here because of what I am and what I can offer to this progressive age because I know what needs to be done."

A string of Labour grandees, led by the former leader Lord Kinnock, rallied support behind the Prime Minister. He warned that divisions equalled the "death penalty" in politics.

David Blunkett, the former Home Secretary, told the rebels they had 24 hours to "put up or shut up," warning: "We cannot take this blood-letting any longer."

Brown allies said afterwards they were confident he would survive and claimed the plot to unseat him was fizzling out. Some potential rebels admitted it might be put on hold until the autumn, despite Labour's disastrous performance in the European elections, in which it came third behind Ukip after winning on a historic low 15 per cent of the vote.

The Prime Minister's attempt to steady the ship ran into more problems when Jane Kennedy, an Environment minister, refused to serve in his administration. She accused Mr Brown of sanctioning smear campaigns against Labour politicians and the undermining of his critics.

Stephen Byers, the Blairite former cabinet minister told the meeting staged by the modernisers group Progress last night: "We need a leader who regards Labour Party members as assets to be valued. A leader who sees Labour MPs as colleagues to be worked with and not threats to be briefed against... A leader who is decisive and not timid. Who can inspire and take our country through these difficult times. We need a leader who can win for Labour at the next general election and not take us to a humiliating defeat. Gordon Brown is not that leader."

Mr Byers added: "Gordon Brown knows who will pay the real price of a Labour defeat. So for those people, families and communities who need a Labour government to protect and promote their interests, Gordon Brown should stand down now as Labour leader and Prime Minister."

Frank Field, another former minister, said: "Labour cannot win with the present Prime Minister. I was one of the seven who would not support his coronation after Tony Blair was shoehorned out of No 10. But even I didn't think a Brown administration would be as inept as this one."

The ComRes poll puts the Tories on 38 per cent (up eight points since its last survey a week earlier), Labour on 22 per cent (no change), the Liberal Democrats on 20 per cent (up two points) and other parties on 20 per cent (down 10 points).

The C2 skilled manual workers and people in the bottom DE social group are twice as likely to vote Tory than Labour, confirming that Mr Brown's party has suffered disproportionately from the scandal over MPs' expenses.

The Tories retain the support of 88 per cent of those who voted for them at the 2005 general election, while 63 per cent of Labour voters would back the party in an election now. So would 74 per cent of those who endorsed the Liberal Democrats.

Last night, some Brown critics acknowledged that the rebellion was fading. One left-winger said: "He has probably done enough. The idea of an early general election is terrifying colleagues."

One leading rebel said: "I'm pretty pessimistic. I think Gordon's going to survive, but discontent will rumble on. There will be simmering disharmony. That is the worst possible scenario for the Labour Party.

"My gut instinct tells me that the carrots and severe sticks from No 10 and the whips have persuaded people to move over. People are being threatened with being smeared in the tabloids if they didn't fall into line."

ComRes telephoned 1,001 GB adults between June 5-7, 2009. Data were weighted by past vote recall. ComRes is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.

Independent poll: Which leader would put the smile back on Labour's face?

Alan Johnson, Home Secretary
Man most likely to succeed Gordon Brown if he is toppled before general election.
Election result with him as leader:
Con 36% Labour 26% Lib Dems 19% (Con six seats short of majority.)
Support among Labour identifiers: 76%

Jack Straw, Justice Secretary
His withdrawal of support could finish Brown.
Election result with him as leader:
Con 36% Labour 25% Lib Dems 19% (Con majority of 10)
Support among Labour identifiers: 71 per cent

David Miliband, Foreign Secretary
Raised profile last summer but campaign faltered
Election result with him as leader:
Con 37% Labour 25% Lib Dems 19% (Con majority: 30)
Support among Labour identifiers: 73%

Jon Cruddas, Backbencher
Turned down ministerial job and enjoys support on left of party.
Election result with him as leader:
Con 36% Labour 22% Lib Dems 21% (Con majority of 42.)
Support among Labour identifiers: 69 per cent

Ed Balls, Schools Secretary
Brown's favoured successor. Ambition to become Chancellor.
Election result with him as leader:
Con 37% Labour 23% Lib Dems 20% (Con majority of 46)
Support among Labour identifiers: 67 per cent

Gordon Brown, Prime Minister
Hoping to see off plotters as Cabinet did not join revolt
Election result with him as leader:
Con 38% Labour 22% Lib Dems 20% (Con majority: 74)
Support among Labour identifiers: 71 per cent

Harriet Harman, Deputy leader
Would be strong candidate in full-scale leadership contest.
Election result with her as leader:
Con 38% Labour 22% Lib Dems 20% (Con majority of 74)
Support among Labour identifiers: 67 per cent

James Purnell, Former cabinet minister
Blairite who quit as Work and Pensions Secretary last Thursday. Would win respect if Brown was ousted.
Election result with him as leader:
Con 38% Labour 21% Lib Dems 21% (Con majority of 94)
Support among Labour identifiers: 66 per cent

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Politics: what is it?
[info]random1y wrote:
Monday, 8 June 2009 at 11:07 pm (UTC)
There is an interesting related debate going on over at the Guardian at the moment: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/08/jaffa-cake-biscuit-vat
Alan Johnson - The Peoples Prime Minister
[info]mike4626 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:30 am (UTC)
as opposed to, Gordon Brown - Labours Failure
Re: Alan Johnson - The Peoples Prime Minister
[info]tonydh wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 08:56 am (UTC)
As opposed to Saint Tony Bliar, the "peoples' Princess"!!!!!
"... over at the Gruanaid"
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 06:32 pm (UTC)
among birdbrains. Anyone with a supportable but politically incorrect opinion is banned.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5422668/Chilli-hot-stuff-immigration-judge-paid-nearly-300000-for-sitting-at-home.html
Structural Change
[info]barncactus wrote:
Monday, 8 June 2009 at 11:15 pm (UTC)
The only solution to the two-party see-saw is a radical change in the whole system. Why do we have to choose between two parties whose historical baggage and devotion to nonsensical dogma leaves them unable to make the decisions necessary to run the country properly? Is this ridiculous system the only thing set in stone in our oh-so-flexible constitution?
There are many ways in which things could be improved. PR could be one of them. Changing the structure of the UK so that the current parliament became a federal one and each country had its own regional parliament could be another (also abolishing the Lords along the way).
The electorate is clearly fed up to the back teeth with lying politicians and the self-serving and virtually dictatorial way the main parties act. Our leaders have squandered enormous sums on banking when such sums could never be found for infrastructure or alleviating poverty. The truth is out - we do (or did) have the money to do things properly, but the politicians would never allow it.
Probably almost no one wants Cameron and his Bullington boys. The solution is to change the system so that it serves the interest of the people, not the charmed circle of parliamentarians within their moats.
Re: Structural Change
[info]longon007 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 12:32 am (UTC)

Reading your piece cheered me up, some where sanity still exists. Meanwhile, the captain of the unsinkable "Molly Brown " sails on, having quelled the mutiny , how many gold pieces did that cost us ?
Re: Structural Change
[info]bleedingekk wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 08:06 am (UTC)
When I see the consequenses of government policies and actions I am more and more convinced that they are deliberately concieved to have a detrimental effect. The justice system is one where there is no second chance. Another is the school system where very young kids are pressured into taking exams far too early, effectively destroying their self esteme at a young age creating insecure slaves (government policy). The working clases are taxed so much that they have virtually no money to live on. While the middle classes are clever enough to fine way's out of tax. The tax loopholes for the rich are put there purposely. BUT THE BIGGEST AND MOST DIABOLICAL SHAME OF OUR COUNTRY IS THE PRIVATE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND JOBS FOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS. Management in Britain is attrocious. This is because many sitting at the top are far too stupid to be there but they went to the right school. Britain must change and neither of the top 2 parties have what it needs they are far too inbred and corrupt and they want it to stay that way...better the ship sinks.
Trouble Making Witches Brew
[info]zened wrote:
Monday, 8 June 2009 at 11:40 pm (UTC)
You just have to love the double-speak!

Who is smearing whom?

Who is making up this story? Is it Torys baiting Labour? Is it Blairities baiting Brown?

Or is 007 spreading disinformation as he is sick of his boss?

This is more fun than a Terminator film!

Politics of Fear
[info]sameth99200 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 12:07 am (UTC)
Nothing short of a massive terrorist attack or a new war will save Labour. However, considering the complete f*ck up of the last anti-terrorist operation when Labour were suffering in the polls I could see them make it worse for themselves by turning it into some classic Brown bumble.

Can anyone else already feel the impending doom as the terrorist alert level is raised to; "Red: The Colour of the Streets as Terrorists Slaughter Our Kittens and Children", or the cracking of a potentially devastating terrorist plot involving supersoakers filled with napalm on a BA flight (to New York of course) is announced after this disastrous poll showing?
Re: Politics of Fear
[info]mannygoldstein wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 05:21 am (UTC)
So true!
Tories put on 8% in a week , only in a ComRes poll!
[info]dave1234567890 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 12:17 am (UTC)
One really has to question how they carry out their polls. Last week before the elections ComRes said that the Tories had fallen to 30% and the Independent wrote a large article stating how worried Cameron should be , despite the fact that it contradicted every other poll and now the Tories are back to 38%. What a load of nonsense.
That is why it is difficult to take the above poll seriously. If I were a Labour rebel I wouldn't be getting too excited at these results , nor would I believe them.
Re: Tories put on 8% in a week , only in a ComRes poll!
[info]ed_fender wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 08:13 am (UTC)
Well put. ComRes have been way out of line with every other polling outfit for ages. They must be cheap.
Could get worse
[info]adamwonderson wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 12:20 am (UTC)
Given the capacity of Brown, a leadership election and then a prompt general election might mean more Labour MPs keeping their jobs than letting the Brown fiasco worsen for another year. A leadership election would get press attention, allow candidates to air new ideas, and generally distract the public from the wreckage. I am sure the MPs will only benefit if they are seen to put the corpse into the coffin in the eyes of the electorate.
(no subject) - [info] - Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 12:33 am (UTC)
Re: UNIFY IN PROGRESS UNDER ONE LABOUR !!!
[info]seraskier wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 12:51 am (UTC)
Utter bollocks. Your cowardly leadership has led Britain into two illegal wars which you cannot justify, and slaughtered 0.5m in one of those wars... in the other war the casulaties are so enormous you dare not print them. You have tried to impose a hated ID-Card system on the country that is clearly unwanted. You have deliberately LIED about the costs of the Olympics. On your watch a civilian was shot and killed in a premeditated slaying by the Met which you have failed to investigate, and you have gerrymandered attempts to investigate it. You are yankee-doodle gutless patsies doing whatever your bosses in the Pentagon tell you. You're SPINELESS.

You are thugs, liars, crooks, warmongers and incompetents. Your party is DEAD, you are HISTORY, GET OUT NOW, BEFORE THE VOTERS *THROW* YOU OUT.

Only the profanity filter prevents me telling you what I think of you, you sack of sh...
Re: UNIFY IN PROGRESS UNDER ONE LABOUR !!!
[info]longon007 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 01:00 am (UTC)


Is that your last word?
Re: UNIFY IN PROGRESS UNDER ONE LABOUR !!!
[info]sameth99200 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 12:57 am (UTC)
Friends, let us not forget the social instability that our UK suffered under the Conservative party has been matched, if not soundly beaten, in degree's of horror by the economic climate of today under the Labour party.
Judas Brown
[info]diddlyoompah wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 01:30 am (UTC)
He's toast because he betrayed us hard up people. Labour is toast because they are pathetic, self-serving wimps trying to string out the pay a bit longer before the trust fund kids chuck them out and really screw us. They'll do nothing before they can head for the hills with their redundancy money and pensions.
Johnson - the same old simian spinelessness
[info]seraskier wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 01:47 am (UTC)
How Alan Johnson voted on key issues since 2001:

Voted a mixture of for and against a transparent Parliament
Voted moderately against introducing a smoking ban
Voted strongly for introducing ID cards
Voted very strongly for introducing foundation hospitals
Voted strongly for introducing student top-up fees
Voted very strongly for Labour's anti-terrorism laws
Voted very strongly for the Iraq war
Voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war
Voted very strongly for replacing Trident
Voted moderately for the hunting ban
Voted very strongly for equal gay rights
Voted for laws to stop climate change

Hardly ever rebels against their party in this parliament.

(from theyworkforyou.com)
Re: Johnson - the same old simian spinelessness
[info]mannygoldstein wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 05:01 am (UTC)
Well done seraskier!

There is constant comment about people finding Alan Johnson 'unknown' because they do not know what he stands for while you have taken the simple, but very effective step, of looking at his record! This powerful analysis shows he very strongly stands;

- For foundation hospitals
- For anti-terrorism laws
- For war in Iraq
- For opposition to an investigation into the Iraq War
- For replacing Trident
- For gay rights

so he wants to break up the NHS, severely curtail civil liberties, likes aggressive and illegal wars, wants to cover up the reasons for such a war, encourages nuclear weapons proliferation and supports homosexuals.

So what would actually change if he replaced Brown?
Re: Johnson - the same old simian spinelessness
[info]trancedylan wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 09:55 am (UTC)
The only way we'll ever have change is if we could get democracy into the U.K. I know that is a long shot, but you never know, with the BNP winning seats there may just be a swing against extremism allowing the majority of us to clean out parliament and the government and give us a fresh start.

Pipe dreams? Well something has to happen or soon we'll probably see the Thatcherite poll-tax riots again.
Error of estimate
[info]nigelamon wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 03:08 am (UTC)
Does anyone else wonder what the error of estimate is in this poll? Assuming it's 3% (it's probably more!) Johnson's figures could range from a high of 29% to a low of 23% while Brown's might be anywhere from 25% to 19%. Cameron's could range equally widely. Thus there is little in the poll that provides statistical "proof" of the thrust of the article or support the headline!
You are the problem, Gordon, as the poll proves!
[info]mannygoldstein wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 03:40 am (UTC)
""You solve the problem not by walking away but by facing it, doing something about it."

If you walk away, the problem will be solved because you are the problem Gordon!

The problem is not your personality or your 'values' or even your henchmen and their activities but your competence.

As Prime Minister and Leader of the Labour Party you have a decade as Chancellor and two years as premier so the is a long track record to provide a basis for analysis. What have you achieved to date? It is possible, once more, to list your shortcomings and failures but in the interests of brevity, let us list your successes since 1997.

What has Gordon Brown actually achieved given the most fortunate circumstances as Chancellor and having been made Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition without having to be elected?

Having fulfilled your life-long ambition for power as Chancellor and Prime Minister you will go down in history as the worst ever, and your refusal to accept this verdict means that you continue to retain office and lead the Labour Party, which you profess to love and serve, to political oblivion.

All of your political opponents are delighted that you survived and remain in office because you do more damage than they ever could!
The Succession
[info]watzat wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 04:22 am (UTC)
Small wonder Alan Johnson looked so pleased at his appointment as Home Secretary. For him especially it is an ideal stepping stone to the leadership - it gives him a higher profile in general, gives the opportunity for statesman-like appearances on issues of national and popular importance and finally perhaps usefully broadens and helps completes his experience of government. I think Brown has appointed his successor.
Vote Labour
[info]sjkillman wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 04:37 am (UTC)
Little more than a third of the electorate bothered to vote - this leaves nearly two thirds to vote for Labour at the next General Election!
Vote Real Labour
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:11 am (UTC)
Two BNP MEPs are two warning shots from Real Labour Britain across the bows of all subversive quisling snouts, not only those being shaken, squealing and snarling at their former fellow travellers, out of government

http://tv.bnp.org.uk/
STOP THIS PANTOMIME:
[info]bgarvie wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 05:22 am (UTC)
Labour have lost all credibility and no amount of musical chairs will save them. They are a discredited Government with a discredited Cabinet. A Cabinet of many unelected and selfserving characters who will never convince the electorate of their ability to govern.
Brown has fooled his Party again, but he doesn't fool the electorate. This pantomime should stop and a General Election called.
Correction
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:15 am (UTC)
pseud "labour" has been warned by Real Labour Britain and given one more chance to pull its socks up. So far there is compliance as the shaking of subversive quisling blatcherists out of the tree - squealing and snarling at their former fellow-travellers
http://tv.bnp.org.uk/
The Prime Minister WON A REPRIEVE, probably at least until the autumn,
[info]famulla wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 05:24 am (UTC)
I say, after reading this. We are not too sure or we cannot trust. All shout ?Brown Go.? Then they see no one for to take the experienced seat and what do we have? Humility wins the day for Gordon Brown as MPs back down. We simply cannot trust those who shout. Incidentally, this is from other paper of UK. Just lost my sleep over the job cuts in B. Airways
Gordon Brown threw himself on the mercy of his party last night and promised to change the way that he governed as he tackled the crisis of confidence that has engulfed his leadership.
The Prime Minister WON A REPRIEVE, probably at least until the autumn, as he told a meeting of more than 400 Labour MPs and peers that he was determined ?>>>to play to my strengths and address my weaknesses?.<<<
He was reported to have secured>>>> overwhelming backing to fight on, <<<<<even though about half a dozen MPs, including Charles Clarke, told him to go. The former Home Secretary was joined by Tom Harris, a former Transport Minister, Siobhain McDonagh, Fiona Mactaggart and Meg Munn, all of whom told Mr Brown that the party would fare better with a new leader. Cameron accuses Brown over 'collapsing' Government. Here one day we see Brown thrown. Gordon Brown suffered another crippling blow last night when the Blairite Work and Pensions Secretary, James Purnell, resigned from the Government. Adrian Hamilton: Don't knock Obama before he's tried in the Middle East. Obama get the chance also. I thank you Firozali A. Mulla
Don't believe a word of it
[info]zansal wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 06:56 am (UTC)
Yet more Johnson spin. It's sad and it's dangerous. The idea that the British electorate would be dumb enough to elect another Labour Government, regardless of who leads it, is appalling.
and to hell with the well-being of Britain & Britons as long the organised gang of snouts is OK
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:08 am (UTC)
Byers is a fool and a slimy scheming fool at that.
[info]proximaking wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:14 am (UTC)
Byers is a fool. The political dynamic of any ousting of Gordie would include an immediate and unstoppable demand for an election and the Tories would be in power before people had a chance to think "Oh F*&K what have we done!" By then it would be too late of course the wrecking balls would be going in everywhere except where they should be going and another 10 years of hard work will be blasted into the ground by a Tory party that has no more knowledge of the real economic world than it does of what is on the other side of the moon. If the last few months have shown us anything it is that Tories don't understand the economy, George Osborne is simply a complete half-wit, and it has shown us that people with moats and duck ponds and so many houses they are not sure how many they have (Cameron himself in the Sunday Times interview a couple of weeks ago) have not one scintilla of an idea how real people live and it would be a disaster for this country if that pond scum was ever again allowed into power.
Re: Byers is a fool and a slimy scheming fool at that.
[info]sportingmac wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 08:38 am (UTC)
..I have to ask what planet you have been on? - or what you are on? I seem to remember that the Tories handed over a plus balance sheet on teh economy. And -- they do care whose money gets spent where. I take it you are a net contributer to the state coffers - thought not!
Alan Johnson as Red Leader?
[info]trancedylan wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:32 am (UTC)
Please bear in mind that Alan Johnson voted for ID cards, for the invasion of Iraq and has a voting record that turns the "genial ex-postman" into a rather Stalinist anti-privacy, anti-individual bigot.
Re: Alan Johnson as Red Leader?
[info]jj9876 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:54 am (UTC)
The public want someone who will roll back the State and get us out of the EU. Is there anyone who has these two central policies? Of the 'main' parties, the closest seems to be UKIP, followed by in distant second position, the Tories. In reality only the Tories seem to be a viable alternative to Labour given the election results over the past few weeks.
Re: Alan Johnson as Red Leader?
[info]trancedylan wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:56 am (UTC)
I must say that I am a Federalist when it comes to Europe; most times they seem to be the only power around that tries to protect us from the excesses and ridiculous policies of our own domestic government.
Johnson, competent but no reformer.
[info]ptstroud wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:48 am (UTC)
For God's sake doesn't the Indy realise that the reason Johnson is considered a good bet for Labour is, once again, just spin. He is being bolstered up by a few who know that the likes of Harman, Miliband, Balls or Straw would be even more unpopular than Brown. But what of his record? He seems to be a competent minister but it must be remembered that he gave into the public sector workers on the age of retirement without a fight. So don't expect a reformer if he takes over.

However, all this is, unfortunately, academic. Brown will not be pushed out unless he flips his lid and is hustled off to The Priory Clinic. He was given a hypocritical standing ovation by the PLP and the rebels were so incompetent they could not even orchestrate a coup. Suddenly he is going to listen. How many times have we heard that. He will be more humble; now that is a new one. But who really believes him?

I'm afraid that we are stuck with the twisted megalomaniac for nearly another year. Even Barry Shearman, who was dubbed a brave man for suggesting the PLP had a secret ballot, has bowed to pressure and is now firmly on side. What a useless coward he has turned out to be.

So we must look forward to nearly a year of government by a wounded mentally unbalanced PM presiding over a cabinet not of his choice. A cabinet that includes such oddities as Mrs, soon to be Lady Kinnock and the loud mouthed bully Alan Sugar. God help us.
Johnson,Straw,Balls
[info]ninsim wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:59 am (UTC)
The thought of a continuation of Labour rule fills me with utter horror. None of the underachievers in the present Government are fit for purpose and anyone who doubts this should listen to what they say when interviewed. Such a prospect should answer the present naive questions of how the BNP achieved their recent successes. The BNP and UKIP focussed on the public's concerns whilst Labour were fiddling their expenses. Not to worry. Gordon Brown will cling to power and succeed in driving his party into oblivion whilst his supporters run around in circles trying to stab him in the back. There will be more celebrity 'shoe-ins' as GB attempts to divert attention from his failures. Britain will become a 'Big Brother' lookalike before achieving the position of Europe's first Third World nation.
Probably true
[info]deimosp wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 08:01 am (UTC)
Any change f leader would help Labour a lot - not only because of who it is but all those Labour inclined people who cannot tollerate the current regime would start to think "maybe this guy/gal can change things" and "maybe they should have another chance". Thus, Brown staying is pretty critical to the Conservatives and the next election. Despite this being well known, Labour seem unable to hear t or realise it or act on it or unable to actually do anything - which maybe says it all about Labour and their current regime
[info]adey_t wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 08:53 am (UTC)
Just shows how gullible some people are. Most people have no idea who he is, but they haven't heard anything bad about him so a few more people say they will vote for Labour. What are his policies? What is his vision. Even he says he doesnt want to be PM. Is this the best the left has???
polls
[info]angryman9 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 10:05 am (UTC)
All of these 'polls' are a waste of bloody time, half of them are owned and run by people with a vested interest in keeping Labour in power, yougov is a joke.
The people 'polled' must be the dumbest of the dumb.
The fact that our corrupt electoral system even gives Labour a chance of avoiding oblivion, is a disgrace.
Alan Johnson Prime Minister
[info]desmelroda wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 10:14 am (UTC)
You are having a laugh Alan Johnson as PM you say it would put a smile on Labour's faces I think David Cameron would be absolutely delighted.
Just who is Alan Johnson
[info]adam1516 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 11:17 am (UTC)
1. ComRes are a laughing stock amongst proper polling agents
2. I would suggest the vast majority of people don't even know who Johnson is
3. He's a 60 yr old Marxist - like Brown
4. Labour will lose the next GE - no matter what
Lord of the ...?
[info]groucho12 wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 12:21 pm (UTC)
Sometimes we see the manic, wild eyed Gollum Gordon who coverts his "precious" prime ministership. Then soothed and reassured we see the good intentioned Smeagol Gordon.
All the time the Dark Lord is whispering in his ear.
Bilbo Blair has departed the scene. Is Alan Johnson the Frodo to cast this rotten parliament into the abyss?
Meanwhile, the fair Tory elves sail off to another (non-eu) land.
Brown Pants
[info]mazaluk wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 04:22 pm (UTC)
Brown is finished. The Labour Party is finished. Its not a mnatter of "if?" but when.

A change of leadership will make no difference at all because Labour is a party divided against itself. RIP
Alan Johnson
[info]gongdonkey wrote:
Tuesday, 9 June 2009 at 07:29 pm (UTC)
Regarding Alan Johnson - putative Labour leader. A Churchill quote : He is a modest man, with much to be modest about.
Sums it up really.

Most popular in UK News



Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date