http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/21/poor-outlook-toxic-labour-jon-cruddas-report-welfare-immigration
At least the "Observer" manages to give an identity to the origin of this story rather than use another anonymous source quoted so often in this "newspaper" and in other parts of the media, when seeking to discredit or undermine the leadership of the Labour party.
However, Toby Helm has taken the "report" as an opportunity to add another element to the continuing Observer/Guardian crusade against the Labour leadership, by quoting from the Jon Cruddas "inquiry". Unfortunately for both the Observer and Cruddas, the conclusions drawn in the report (as quoted by this newspaper), are wrong and seem, with a few exceptions, to be more critical of the Labour party of pre 2015 and the "Torylite" policies offering essentially the same measures as the conservatives, but wrapped in a different coloured wrapping paper. More cuts, but not as deeply. More austerity, but implemented differently. Encourage house building but nowhere near the figure actually required, the list goes on and on. It is little wonder that that Labour did so badly, particularly in Scotland where the SNP offered essentially, the policies which Labour should have been presenting and in the South where a number of parties were opposing austerity.
Cruddas states that Labour is loosing voters to UKIP. That may have been the case in the 2015 election, particularly in the south of the country, but it now seems that traditional Labour voters are returning and it is UKIP that is becoming the "irrelevance". In the case of Sadiq Khan and his election in London, Cruddas grudgingly admits that "becoming mayor of London was a triumph" and then qualifies his his opinion with the sneer that it was different in Thurrock. Perhaps Cruddas should also concede that it was different in many other parts of the country where Labour gained seats and also gained control of councils. The local elections of May were not a stunning electoral victory. However, neither were they the crushing defeat that some had predicted.
There has been a significant shift of opinion both within the Labour party membership and around the country since September of last year. There is a distinct change in Labour party policies and in party direction. Cruddas may not like the change in the party mood and emphasis, clearly the Observer/Guardian would prefer a return to a more Blairite party and certain elements within the Parliamentary Labour Party are incensed that their positions of influence and power over the party has been greatly diminished.
There is a long way to go before the election in 2020 and the Labour party has much work to do in putting the message across. The Labour party will win a majority at the 2020 election, despite the diversions created by Cruddas and others, and encouraged by the media and television.
‘Irrelevant and toxic’ Labour losing out to Ukip, inquiry finds
 |
| Jon Cruddas. MP for Dagenham and Rainham |
At least the "Observer" manages to give an identity to the origin of this story rather than use another anonymous source quoted so often in this "newspaper" and in other parts of the media, when seeking to discredit or undermine the leadership of the Labour party.
However, Toby Helm has taken the "report" as an opportunity to add another element to the continuing Observer/Guardian crusade against the Labour leadership, by quoting from the Jon Cruddas "inquiry". Unfortunately for both the Observer and Cruddas, the conclusions drawn in the report (as quoted by this newspaper), are wrong and seem, with a few exceptions, to be more critical of the Labour party of pre 2015 and the "Torylite" policies offering essentially the same measures as the conservatives, but wrapped in a different coloured wrapping paper. More cuts, but not as deeply. More austerity, but implemented differently. Encourage house building but nowhere near the figure actually required, the list goes on and on. It is little wonder that that Labour did so badly, particularly in Scotland where the SNP offered essentially, the policies which Labour should have been presenting and in the South where a number of parties were opposing austerity.
Cruddas states that Labour is loosing voters to UKIP. That may have been the case in the 2015 election, particularly in the south of the country, but it now seems that traditional Labour voters are returning and it is UKIP that is becoming the "irrelevance". In the case of Sadiq Khan and his election in London, Cruddas grudgingly admits that "becoming mayor of London was a triumph" and then qualifies his his opinion with the sneer that it was different in Thurrock. Perhaps Cruddas should also concede that it was different in many other parts of the country where Labour gained seats and also gained control of councils. The local elections of May were not a stunning electoral victory. However, neither were they the crushing defeat that some had predicted.
There has been a significant shift of opinion both within the Labour party membership and around the country since September of last year. There is a distinct change in Labour party policies and in party direction. Cruddas may not like the change in the party mood and emphasis, clearly the Observer/Guardian would prefer a return to a more Blairite party and certain elements within the Parliamentary Labour Party are incensed that their positions of influence and power over the party has been greatly diminished.
There is a long way to go before the election in 2020 and the Labour party has much work to do in putting the message across. The Labour party will win a majority at the 2020 election, despite the diversions created by Cruddas and others, and encouraged by the media and television.
Comments
Post a Comment