Deputy Leadership thoughts - 11 comments

I mentioned earlier that I hadn't been enthused by the deputy leadership election/campaigns, and was wondering if there was any way at all I could use my vote positively.

For a time, I convinced myself that Jon Cruddas was the way to go:

• He gives the impression of wanting the job most.
  
• Introducing Jon will allow his deputy leadership rivals to concentrate on their existing ministerial briefs: International Development is too important for Hilary Benn to be shifted onto party business.

But there were problems, too:

• His apparent support for BME shortlists for parliamentary selections (discussed to death here).
• His position over Iraq:

  "I saw the case for removing a tyrant who was a threat because of his possession of weapons of mass destruction and who had already used them against his own people. [...] I now state unequivocally that I was wrong, not only over the original premise but also on account of the consequences since [...]"

• His support for Venezuelan President Chávez's shutting-down of a politically hostile TV station.

Perhaps these are his own personal views, that wouldn't affect his commitment to rebuilding our broad Labour Party, but as other people seem to be happy to back him on the basis of those same views, I think I'm entitled to say: (a) that I don't agree; and (b) that they don't indicate a sufficiently consistent (for me) commitment to democratic and pluralist principles.

A common premise is that the decline in Labour's vote/membership/campaign ability is a consequence of unpopular policies. If so, our new deputy leader must presumably either (a) have the ability to use his knowledge and influence to alter those policy outputs; (b) to motivate members and voters, persuading them that the policies are sound (or, perhaps, to hang on long enough for them change more dramatically) - 'reinvigorating' them, if you will; or else (c) to instigate some kind of organisational/managerial reform to make the figures look better with much the same policies. I don't know what the answer is, but if a deputy leader is to make a difference, they can hardly come in with very high hopes of single-handedly fixing (a).

And yet my brief recruitment experience reminded me that I have been more attracted to candidates who were keen and had their own ideas, however different, than to those who appeared reputable, however decent. While not setting specific criteria for success in the deputy leadership role, Cruddas seems happy to have his performance judged. Coming from outside the Cabinet the chances of him 'going native' or disappearing into the system are reduced.

The Cogwriter then popped-up with this thoughtful post:

[...] I shan't even be voting for the candidate who most closely addresses the issues I am worried out - in particular, civil liberties, terrorism and climate change: that is to say, I shan't be voting for the person who has suddenly and - for me, quite surprisingly - almost become my political soul mate.

No. In a world where truth has been magically bent by wordsmiths as artful as any Beckham, I shall simply be voting for the candidate I think can make the Labour Party work as a campaigning machine again.

For if we get that right, everything else will fall into place.

Not through the big bucks or the dirty donations of recent times, but through the volunteering activities of good men and woman.

So whoever you think can do that - vote for them!

So, on the proviso that:

• Jon Cruddas's strategy does not consist of trying to recast Labour around some kind of off-the-shelf 'left-of-Blair' position that it is perceived will cause supporters to flood back.
• His strategy recognises that MPs and councillors have a mandate that goes beyond party members.
• This vote isn't taken to be a referendum or a proxy for any other issue; and most importantly of all:
• Compass and Ken Livingstone stop sending me gushing emails on Jon's behalf.

My vote will be as follows:

1. Cruddas
2. Johnson

And best of luck to the winner!