Was Labour 1997-2010 The Worst Government Ever?

Over on the Telegraph blogs Sean Thomas outlines the case and it is hard to argue with.

I suppose worst ever might be pushing it- the governments that presided over the Irish potato famine or appeasement might be worse- but Blair and Brown surely led the most incompetent administrations in British post war history.

It's not that other governments didn't do worse in particular areas than Labour in this era- it's that there was full spectrum failure in pretty much every department- the economy, defence, foreign policy, education, welfare, immigration, race relations, inequality and health care were all disaster areas when Labour left office.

Can anyone think of any substantive successes associated with the last government>

Tom Watson- Crusader Or Sleaze Monger?

The retracted Newsnight allegations about a paedophile ring involving senor Tories followed on from allegation made by the MP Tom Watson in Parliament.

During the Damian McBride affair- in which Gordon Brown's aide was outed plotting to smear various Conservatives, usually by making up sexual rumours- some attention was paid to the role of Tom Watson.

Watson shared an office with McBride and was on good terms with the other man involved in the scandal- Derek Draper- but no emails emerged to prove Watson's involvement and he got a bit litigious when it was suggested that he was part of the scheme.

Yet it has to be said, his "exposure" of a paedophile ring linked to the Thatcher government does seem to have had a very similar effect to that which was intended by the McBride plot. A number of senior Conservatives have had false rumours spread about them online as a result of dark hints dropped by Watson (with the help of Newsnight) without any actual evidence.

It does make you wonder whether Tom Watson actually believed that there was substance to the paedophile ring which he referred to or whether he was using the Jimmy Savile scandal and parliamentary privilege as an opportunity to slime those on his enemies list.

Labour Stupidity In Action

As the previous post demonstrated, Labour MPs are on average very stupid- yet very confident about their own ability despite any evidence to the contrary.

Their conference has thrown up many examples of this, but lets start with Ed Balls and his big idea- taking the money from the sale of 4G licences to mobile phone operators and using it to build 100000 homes and subsidise first time buyers.

It isn't exactly clear why widespread property ownership is such an obvious public good that it should be subsidised. Germany has far lower rates of home ownership than Britain, yet seems to have a more robust economy.

The problem of not enough homes being built is fundamentally about nimbyism and a lack of clear property rights. If neighbours are given too much say in what people can build on their own land, then building is going to be artificially depressed.

So after a crash caused to some extent by a housing bubble his solution is to reflate the bubble! And to squander 4-5 Billion pounds on benefiting a tiny, tiny minority of the country at everyone else's expense.

Whilst the national debt keeps rising ever higher.

MPs Thick, Labour MPs Especially

A total of 97 MPs were asked this probability problem: if you spin a coin twice, what is the probability of getting two heads?

Among Conservative members, 47% gave the wrong answer, which is disappointing enough. But of the 44 Labour MPs who took part, 77% answered incorrectly.

77%!

It does explain a few things though- the basic innumeracy could be one of the reasons why Labour always propose spending bonanzas that are vastly greater than any real increase in wealth- and why Labour governments always leave economic catastrophes behind them.

I am being serious here- the inability to think past stage one is evident in a lot of Labour's previous actions and at the ideas on show at their conference this week- registering journalists, spending all the 4G money on one particular pet project etc, etc.

Humans use two mental methods for reaching conclusions- the one we use most often is intuitive and takes little effort. This means it is often wrong. The slower method uses reasoning and logic- this is hard work but tends to be right more often.

Hail To The All Knowing Ed Miliband.

Oh joy, Labour have a new policy:

The Labour leader will criticise companies with the “wrong values” who do not create jobs, invest in companies or train their staff.

Mr Miliband will tell the party’s annual conference that the days when all businesses are taxed and regulated equally should be over. Instead, firms will be judged according to how they make their money.

So Labour's solution to the economy is to micromanage businesses by judging whether they have the "wrong values"?

Equality before the law is one of the things that enabled England to become a financial and commercial centre centuries ago- as traders knew that if they had a legal dispute in England they would be protected by a legal system where the rule of law was what mattered- not if you were favoured by the powers that be.

This is a valuable asset to this country and to throw it away in favour of special rules for different businesses depending upon whether ministers (with no obvious qualifications for judging the worthiness of businesses) is insane.

Handing A Madman The Controls

Alastair Darling's take on Gordon Brown tenure as Prime Minister is devastating even if it merely confirms what has already been written- that Brown was deluded about the economic situation, impossible to reason with, a bully and governed through lackeys.

It also confirms my belief that if Labour had wanted to be a serious opposition to the coalition, who could form a credible alternative government, then they should have persuaded Alastair Darling to stand for the leadership.

Still given that this is the latest memoir- following on from Mandelson's and Blair's- to confirm that all the hotly denied rumours of Gordon Brown's behaviour were in fact true and had been an issue in government since day one- why was he elevated to the leadership without any opposition? It is hard to believe that there were not enough MPs who knew about Brown's behaviour to give their signatures to a rival candidate. They chose collectively to put their own careers ahead of saving their party and the country the disaster of a Brown premiership.

One Day Son, All This Will Be Yours

Labour have chosen their candidate to take on Louise Mensch in the constituency of Corby (twinned with Mordor)- a man named Andy Sawford. The name is familiar because from 1997 to 2005 my MP in the neighbouring constituency of Kettering was Phil Sawford- Andy's father who was:

"one of the few avowed republicans in the Commons."

Because hereditary privilege is a terrible thing.

Milidoomed

In the Grauniad, Dan Hodges argues that Ed Miliband needs to reach out to"Labour's lost Tories", who voted for Blair in 1997, 2001 and 2005. Which is true in one sense- to win a majority Labour need to get a number of habitual Tories to vote for them not rely on the "progressive majority" which isn't a majority.

Having said that, Blair in 1994 was appealing to Tory voters who hadn't endured Labour misgovernment for 15 years. Miliband can't do what Blair did.

He faces the same problem that William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith faced as leaders of the Conservative Party- trying to reach a centre ground that isn't listening risks alienating the core voters which sinks parties at a low ebb even lower. Hague and IDS both had to retreat to a core vote strategy after early efforts to reposition the party were rejected.

Miliband's best option is to rebuild Labour's infrastructure so that when voters are ready to give them another go they are able to campaign on the ground to win them. Mopping up left wing Lib Dems is part of that as is gaining local councillors.

He probably won't gain anything from this personally but he will his successor a much better chance of being Prime Minister. A fine fraternal gift.

Two Eds Is Worse Than One

The problem with the promotion of Ed Balls to Labour's economic brief isn't that he is a serial backstabber who will play dirty to destroy anyone in his way- that is abhorrent but quite a useful trait in politics. It isn't that he was Gordon Brown's right hand man as he wrecked our finances- who will recall that? It isn't even that his strategy for dealing with the downturn is to keep on borrowing until we make Greece look like a model of financial probity.

The problem with the appointment of Ed Balls as Labour's Shadow Chancellor is that it shows that Ed Miliband has no idea what the economic policy of a future Labour government should look like. Alan Johnson's economic outlook was more moderate and recognised the need to tackle the deficit than that of Ed Balls- who believes that cutting the deficit should wait until after the economy recovers.

Obviously I think Ed Balls is wrong but that isn't the point, the point is that by appointing Alan Johnson, Labour were advocating one approach and just three months later they have flipped and are now promoting a previously rejected strategy.

How can Labour hope to effectively communicate with the public if their leader does not know what it is that he wants to communicate. The only hope of any coherence to Labour's economic strategy is to cede control to Balls- which would put Miliband in the same position Tony Blair was with respect to Gordon Brown.

Labour Recovery?

Before the last election Lib Dem voters were split between preferring a coalition with the Tories or a coalition with Labour. Since then they have lost most of their Labour leaning supporters. This is probably why Labour now have a solid lead in the opinion polls despite the disastrous performance of the last government and the widespread lack of faith in Ed Miliband.

This isn't to say the Lib Dems made the wrong decision in May, had they gone into coalition with Labour then their more right leaning supporters would have left instead.

What this means though is that Labour will do much better in bye elections, such as the one yesterday in Oldham, between now and 2015 than had previously been anticipated and could be a much more substantial force at the election than previously believed.

You Know A Brand Is In Trouble

When they have to make big discounts before Christmas.

The Provisional Wing Of New Labour Strikes.

The headteacher who has ordered her deputy to "work from home" after she spoke at the Conservative Party conference turns out to be the same headteacher who let her school be used for the launch of the 2001 Labour election campaign. So speaking a party conference is too political but inviting one party to actually use school premises is perfectly fine. This is like Richard Hammond suspending a member of the Top Gear team because he jumped a red light.

The school issued a statement:

‘Teachers will always have opinions about the ways in which schools should be run. Our concern is that the position of the Academy should not be misrepresented.
‘Generalisations about teachers and schools can be seen as insulting to many teachers who have worked hard to make a difference.’

Arguing that the speech was wrong because it "can be seen as insulting" is basically saying that Katherine Birbalsingh isn't merely responsible for what she says but for what morons could take away as being what she said. In so far as the school's argument is that their teachers are too stupid to understand a simple speech, they actually are insulting them.

The Famous Mr Ed.

It's too early to say what effect the election of Ed Miliband to Labour leader will have. During the campaign he seemed the less likely of the two brothers to take Labour back to the centre ground and a bit too willing to tell people what they wanted to hear. Labour members seem to believe he is less likely to win the election than Bananaman, which is perhaps why they voted for David. In the short term he will certainly get a boost in the polls and Labour should be ahead in the polls by next week but unless he changes tack and starts adopting a more moderate tone, in defiance of what his party wants, then he will never be prime minister.

Cuban Cuts

It must be hard for the TUC and Labour Party to argue that public sector cuts are proof of the coalition government's right wing ideological zeal, when even the Cuban government are instituting major public spending cuts.

Labour Leadership

Who I want to win: Ed Balls, a divisive figure who will keep Labour on the margins.

Who should win: David Miliband, he's a bit weird and has a habit of speaking in meaningless generalities but he seems determined to fight on the centre ground rather than appealing to the base.

Who will win: Ed Miliband, he will hoover up the second preferences from any other candidate.

Who should have stood: Alastair Darling, he is a much more substantive figure than any of the candidates. The economic woes were largely the result of his predecessor as Chancellor and he appears to be an honourable individual (resisted pressure from Brown & Balls to cook the books according to Mandleson's memoirs) apart from a bit of flipping.

An Elegant Knifing.

Australia has a new Prime Minister after an internal coup d'etat by the ruling Labor Party replaced Kevin Rudd with Julia Gillard. They ditch leaders quite a lot in that party, Rudd himself came to office when he knifed Kim Beazley. Several other Labor leaders have found themselves unceremoniously dumped starting with Bill Hayden 30 years ago who was replaced by the much more effective Bob Hawke.

The ruthlessness of the party is in stark contrast to their British equivalent, our Labour Party develops a sentimental attachment to their leaders no matter how useless they turn out to be and no matter how much it hurts their party. Michael Foot, Neil Kinnock and Gordon Brown have all benefited from this. The only leader they have knifed was the one who brought them multiple election victories.

The Australians have it right in my view, keeping a leader who isn't cutting the mustard is a betrayal of the voters, especially in a two party system.

Labour Comedy Evening

Apparently fantasising about murdering Margaret Thatcher is guaranteed to raise a titter at Labour & Union gatherings, especially when it's done by a man who enthusiastically praises an organisation that actually did try to murder her.

The thing is I can't imagine anyone making a "joke" like that at a Tory gathering about a leading left wing figure and receiving applause for it, and it was applause McDonnell got not laughter.

Whilst I certainly hope we don't see Mr McDonnell being charged with anything, the fact that such unhinged hatred is so widely accepted on the left is telling. In fact this sort of hatred is so ingrained that they can't see anything wrong with it, so for example Sunny Hundal believes that it is comparable to Daniel Hannan arguing that we should have a different form of health care provision. I don't follow that line of reasoning either. In fairness his response is at least better than the complete silence by the rest of the left.

Not a single Labour leadership rival has condemned him for his remarks either which tells you how they judge the likely reaction within the Labour Party to the sentiments he expressed.

Via Obo.

Chutzpah

Noted Labour intellectual, David Lammy, writes:

If we get these things right, Boris will be vulnerable. In 2008 Labour recorded its worst local election results for 40 years. This time, Tory ministers will be overseeing some of the most savage cuts to public services since Margaret Thatcher's time in office. Boris, meanwhile, will have his own record to defend.

Two years ago Boris was an irreverent figure, cycling to City Hall to announce his candidacy. But every day it becomes clearer he is just another politician. He has developed a reputation for reneging on pledges, indulging in cronyism, and dodging responsibility for issues like policing. He has done nothing to ease London's chronic housing shortage, the Olympics risks running way over budget, and he has wasted money on vanity projects. He seems more interested in replacing Cameron than in his own job.

That's right, Labour have been out of office less than a month and he is already using Labour's failures- the Olympic Budget, lack of housing, and the necessity of cuts- to bash his opponents. For a support of Ken Livingstone to denounce mayoral vanity projects is pretty impressive too given that Livingstone decided that London needed its own foreign policy during his tenure.

Give David Miliband A Hand

When a YouTube video is embedded on a site then a still image captured from the video appears before you press play. It's unfortunate that the still image of David Miliband in his official campaign launch video makes it seem as though he is indicating that he is a wanker.



In fairness he is at least more realistic about the scale of Labour's defeat than his rivals.

Profiles In Courage

If you opposed the war in Iraq, what sort of candidate for leader of the Labour Party is preferable- someone who supports the war or someone who didn't believe in it but voted for it anyway but didn't think to mention their opposition until they thought it was beneficial to their careers?