| How about a Labour orientated historical debate 10:26 - May 19 with 1180 views | Keno |
Who would have been the better long term leader John Smith or Robin Cook?
Just feel we ought to raise the level of discussion of here and have something a but more cultured and cerebral
Thoughts welcome
who else could/should they have had over the years?
[Post edited 19 May 2020 10:26]
|  |
| |  |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 10:47 - May 19 with 1149 views | Guthrum |
Cook was a principled chap and something of a rebel, but I'm not sure he would have been able to effectively lead the party. As Corbyn found, that isn't necessarily a recipe for success. Leadership, organisation and maintaining discipline/direction are rather more important.
Smith, on the other hand, had already displayed an ability to reform structures and institutions within Labour, without causing a split (tho he was helped in that by Kinnock having paved the way). |  |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 10:54 - May 19 with 1137 views | Keno |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 10:47 - May 19 by Guthrum |
Cook was a principled chap and something of a rebel, but I'm not sure he would have been able to effectively lead the party. As Corbyn found, that isn't necessarily a recipe for success. Leadership, organisation and maintaining discipline/direction are rather more important.
Smith, on the other hand, had already displayed an ability to reform structures and institutions within Labour, without causing a split (tho he was helped in that by Kinnock having paved the way). |
Smith is the interesting one. He was a good leader but there where some issues over how generally electable he was.
But without the ground work he did its unlikely Blair/New Labour would have come through in the way they did | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:05 - May 19 with 1123 views | GeoffSentence |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 10:54 - May 19 by Keno |
Smith is the interesting one. He was a good leader but there where some issues over how generally electable he was.
But without the ground work he did its unlikely Blair/New Labour would have come through in the way they did |
Jon Smith's daughter was one of (the original one I think) those engimatic but beautiful actor's who appeared as the hooded widow in the advertising campaign for Scottish Widows. For that reason Smith would have been the better leader. |  |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:05 - May 19 with 1123 views | Guthrum |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 10:54 - May 19 by Keno |
Smith is the interesting one. He was a good leader but there where some issues over how generally electable he was.
But without the ground work he did its unlikely Blair/New Labour would have come through in the way they did |
He was, for me, very much part of a trend, from the more hardline Foot, moderating through Kinnock and Smith to Blair (then reversing itself via Brown and Miliband to Corbyn). Each proceeding from where his predecessor left off.
I tend to think Smith would have been elected if still leader in 1997, just because the Conservatives were such a mess by that stage. It would have taken a monumental c0ck-up not to.
One wonders if he would have allowed himself to be entangled in the 2003 Gulf War to the extent Blair did. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:06 - May 19 with 1122 views | homer_123 |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 10:54 - May 19 by Keno |
Smith is the interesting one. He was a good leader but there where some issues over how generally electable he was.
But without the ground work he did its unlikely Blair/New Labour would have come through in the way they did |
I don' think, sadly, there was anyone electable until Blair came along. Kinnock, Smith, Cook at al - none of them would have won an election. |  |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:10 - May 19 with 1117 views | homer_123 |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:05 - May 19 by Guthrum |
He was, for me, very much part of a trend, from the more hardline Foot, moderating through Kinnock and Smith to Blair (then reversing itself via Brown and Miliband to Corbyn). Each proceeding from where his predecessor left off.
I tend to think Smith would have been elected if still leader in 1997, just because the Conservatives were such a mess by that stage. It would have taken a monumental c0ck-up not to.
One wonders if he would have allowed himself to be entangled in the 2003 Gulf War to the extent Blair did. |
Not convinced Smith would have won but agree re. your thoughts in the last sentence. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:20 - May 19 with 1111 views | Guthrum |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:10 - May 19 by homer_123 |
Not convinced Smith would have won but agree re. your thoughts in the last sentence. |
I just remember the almost daily batterings the Conservative government were taking, the scandals, the infighting, by-election losses and defections. Their HoC majority had gone. Think any kind of half-competent campaign could have taken them apart, tho not to anything like the extent showman Blair did.
Whether Smith changed tack on nationalisation (as Blair did) is probably about the only thing which might have made a difference, IMO. Even that is questionable, depending upon how Clause 4 was emphasised/implemented and campaigned on. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:20 - May 19 with 1110 views | Darth_Koont |
Smith, I'd have thought.
His democratisation of the Labour Party was necessary and I believe* part of a wider understanding of political representation. Unfortunately, Blair took that opportunity and made Labour less representative to its members and even the country's needs. He was promoting an alternative Establishment more than an actual alternative for many people and regions outside of that sphere.
*We'll never know how Smith would have carried on leading the Labour party and what he would have sacrificed to be PM. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:25 - May 19 with 1105 views | Keno |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:05 - May 19 by GeoffSentence |
Jon Smith's daughter was one of (the original one I think) those engimatic but beautiful actor's who appeared as the hooded widow in the advertising campaign for Scottish Widows. For that reason Smith would have been the better leader. |
The original Scottish Widows 'widow' was Deborah Moore daughter of Roger Moore | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:27 - May 19 with 1107 views | homer_123 |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:20 - May 19 by Guthrum |
I just remember the almost daily batterings the Conservative government were taking, the scandals, the infighting, by-election losses and defections. Their HoC majority had gone. Think any kind of half-competent campaign could have taken them apart, tho not to anything like the extent showman Blair did.
Whether Smith changed tack on nationalisation (as Blair did) is probably about the only thing which might have made a difference, IMO. Even that is questionable, depending upon how Clause 4 was emphasised/implemented and campaigned on. |
Maybe you are right - it was a mess of a time for the Tories at that juncture. I just remember feeling, at that time, that I couldn't see the public voting him in.
Would Smith have won with a similar majority (had they) - def not and then it's finger in the wind time for whether he would have won a second?
No doubt that had Smith won Labour leadership would have been different. If memory serves he was reluctant to let BoE set rates? We may have take much longer to get involved in the Iraw war (we certainly wouldn't have seen Smith love up to GWB).
All that said, I think Smith was in it for the right reasons and had a bit more about him and his politics. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:39 - May 19 with 1085 views | GeoffSentence |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:25 - May 19 by Keno |
The original Scottish Widows 'widow' was Deborah Moore daughter of Roger Moore |
And there you have it, Roger Moore really was the best bond. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:55 - May 19 with 1078 views | Guthrum |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 11:27 - May 19 by homer_123 |
Maybe you are right - it was a mess of a time for the Tories at that juncture. I just remember feeling, at that time, that I couldn't see the public voting him in.
Would Smith have won with a similar majority (had they) - def not and then it's finger in the wind time for whether he would have won a second?
No doubt that had Smith won Labour leadership would have been different. If memory serves he was reluctant to let BoE set rates? We may have take much longer to get involved in the Iraw war (we certainly wouldn't have seen Smith love up to GWB).
All that said, I think Smith was in it for the right reasons and had a bit more about him and his politics. |
I think it's unquestionable that a Smith majority wouldn't have been on the scale of Blair's. And what difference that might have made to the continued collapse of the Conservatives in subsequent years is an interesting question. Tho, given that was centered around the pro/anti-EU position, perhaps not much.
I agree that policy would have been far more "traditional" Labour than we saw under Blair. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 12:12 - May 19 with 1059 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Not sure being dead would improve either's leadership credentials.... although a corpse would probably make a better leader than Corbyn.
Cook was nothing like a leader - though he clearly had a few scruples outside his family life.
The other Milliband might have prevented the labour party's descent into farce - and you could argue the fallout is still being felt as Starmer tries to re-establish credibility with a lightweight team and some heavy hitters marooned on the outside as mayors.
A more realistic debate might be when/if Johnson exits stage left at the end of the year, having delivered the will of the British people- who of the current Tories can attempt to steer a path through the mayhem to come - and try to achieve a bit of credibility. Step forward Prime MInister Rishi Sunak |  |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 12:25 - May 19 with 1042 views | Guthrum |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 12:12 - May 19 by ElephantintheRoom |
Not sure being dead would improve either's leadership credentials.... although a corpse would probably make a better leader than Corbyn.
Cook was nothing like a leader - though he clearly had a few scruples outside his family life.
The other Milliband might have prevented the labour party's descent into farce - and you could argue the fallout is still being felt as Starmer tries to re-establish credibility with a lightweight team and some heavy hitters marooned on the outside as mayors.
A more realistic debate might be when/if Johnson exits stage left at the end of the year, having delivered the will of the British people- who of the current Tories can attempt to steer a path through the mayhem to come - and try to achieve a bit of credibility. Step forward Prime MInister Rishi Sunak |
Past conditional = had they lived longer (or if Cook had become leader instead of Blair, rather than ruling himself out).
Counterfactual speculation is an interesting and sometimes informative pastime. [Post edited 19 May 2020 12:27]
| |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 12:29 - May 19 with 1033 views | Guthrum |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 12:12 - May 19 by ElephantintheRoom |
Not sure being dead would improve either's leadership credentials.... although a corpse would probably make a better leader than Corbyn.
Cook was nothing like a leader - though he clearly had a few scruples outside his family life.
The other Milliband might have prevented the labour party's descent into farce - and you could argue the fallout is still being felt as Starmer tries to re-establish credibility with a lightweight team and some heavy hitters marooned on the outside as mayors.
A more realistic debate might be when/if Johnson exits stage left at the end of the year, having delivered the will of the British people- who of the current Tories can attempt to steer a path through the mayhem to come - and try to achieve a bit of credibility. Step forward Prime MInister Rishi Sunak |
Tho I agree that Sunak is about the only government minister who has enhanced their reputation during this crisis. Tho that is partly because he had the easiest job (giving away money with few restraints). [Post edited 19 May 2020 12:29]
| |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 13:49 - May 19 with 989 views | WeWereZombies |
Thinking back to the 1992 election what I remember most is Neil Kinnock having it seemingly in the bag and then throwing it away because he couldn't perform the words 'we're all alright' or 'you're all alright' or 'alright alright' or 'now then, now then' or whatever his spin doctors were trying to get him to say. Neither John Smith or Robin Cook would have pandered to that level of Americanism and I believe that enough of the voting public would have responded to the show of integrity to see each over the line.
Of the two is there any doubt that John Smith would have made the better Prime Minister, he had enough determination to see policies through but enough diplomacy to get fellow politicians to accept what was for the overall good despite their personal qualms. And he had bundles of energy. The combination of all three of those admirable qualities is probably what put too much strain on his heart.
The only question mark against either man is how they would have fared in Europe (I don't think either of them would have had much truck with United States imperialism and we would have avoided involvement in the second Iraq war), exchange rate pressure on sterling may have made a second term a tricky prospect. |  |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 14:18 - May 19 with 959 views | Keno |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 12:12 - May 19 by ElephantintheRoom |
Not sure being dead would improve either's leadership credentials.... although a corpse would probably make a better leader than Corbyn.
Cook was nothing like a leader - though he clearly had a few scruples outside his family life.
The other Milliband might have prevented the labour party's descent into farce - and you could argue the fallout is still being felt as Starmer tries to re-establish credibility with a lightweight team and some heavy hitters marooned on the outside as mayors.
A more realistic debate might be when/if Johnson exits stage left at the end of the year, having delivered the will of the British people- who of the current Tories can attempt to steer a path through the mayhem to come - and try to achieve a bit of credibility. Step forward Prime MInister Rishi Sunak |
The history of the labour over the past 30 year in interesting not least for the big 'what might have been' with Jon Smith
Also interesting as there are parallels with what happened with Militant Tendancy back then and with Momentum now | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 14:28 - May 19 with 949 views | Darth_Koont |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 14:18 - May 19 by Keno |
The history of the labour over the past 30 year in interesting not least for the big 'what might have been' with Jon Smith
Also interesting as there are parallels with what happened with Militant Tendancy back then and with Momentum now |
Although I've seen people compare Militant to Momentum a little too often. Militant were a specific ideological tendency whereas Momentum are a grassroots organisation with far too many members to be as ideologically narrow.
Engaging people in politics locally and critically in the community rather than through the traditional power structures is a good thing. It's the sort of thing US politics does better at a state and local level whereas we're much too centralised and caught up with internal politics as a result.
If Starmer has any sense he'll engage with Momentum and make use of it. And in doing so de-politicise it.
In terms of internal factions that are steering the party away from the ordinary members and voters, he should be a lot more concerned about Progress and Labour First based on the past 5 years or more. And active in dealing with them. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 14:36 - May 19 with 938 views | ElephantintheRoom |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 14:18 - May 19 by Keno |
The history of the labour over the past 30 year in interesting not least for the big 'what might have been' with Jon Smith
Also interesting as there are parallels with what happened with Militant Tendancy back then and with Momentum now |
There have been so many changes to constituencies in recent years that any meaningful change for Labour would now be quite a challenge - especially now that Scotland is effectively a no go zone.
However - the meltdown that is fast approaching is something that can be capitalised on IF there is anyone in Labour capable for planning ahead for a public presumably now thinking for a year or two that a welfare state is really rather useful and also a functional NHS, perhaps even with something revolutionary like care in the community might also be rather desirable.
These were all big issues for a deluded and destitute country emerging as a shadow of its former self after WW2 - and Labour actually captured the public mood back then - albeit briefly.
Now we are a deluded and destitute country about to combine a self-made recession with a muddled covid response recession at the very time our heathcare and social care should receive massive funding and restructuring.
Quite an opportunity, albeit five years down the line. Has Starmer noticed? Maybe.... I doubt the Tories have | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 14:48 - May 19 with 933 views | Darth_Koont |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 14:36 - May 19 by ElephantintheRoom |
There have been so many changes to constituencies in recent years that any meaningful change for Labour would now be quite a challenge - especially now that Scotland is effectively a no go zone.
However - the meltdown that is fast approaching is something that can be capitalised on IF there is anyone in Labour capable for planning ahead for a public presumably now thinking for a year or two that a welfare state is really rather useful and also a functional NHS, perhaps even with something revolutionary like care in the community might also be rather desirable.
These were all big issues for a deluded and destitute country emerging as a shadow of its former self after WW2 - and Labour actually captured the public mood back then - albeit briefly.
Now we are a deluded and destitute country about to combine a self-made recession with a muddled covid response recession at the very time our heathcare and social care should receive massive funding and restructuring.
Quite an opportunity, albeit five years down the line. Has Starmer noticed? Maybe.... I doubt the Tories have |
"Now we are a deluded and destitute country about to combine a self-made recession with a muddled covid response recession at the very time our heathcare and social care should receive massive funding and restructuring."
Agree with this. The only problem is that our politicians and media definitely aren't destitute nor are they likely to see the worst of our health and social care. We're rather relying on them doing and reporting what's right, even at possibly a financial and career cost to themselves and upsetting their employers and backers.
Can't see that happening without some form of mass and hopefully peaceful revolt that actually threatens their positions of power. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 15:44 - May 19 with 911 views | ElephantintheRoom |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 14:48 - May 19 by Darth_Koont |
"Now we are a deluded and destitute country about to combine a self-made recession with a muddled covid response recession at the very time our heathcare and social care should receive massive funding and restructuring."
Agree with this. The only problem is that our politicians and media definitely aren't destitute nor are they likely to see the worst of our health and social care. We're rather relying on them doing and reporting what's right, even at possibly a financial and career cost to themselves and upsetting their employers and backers.
Can't see that happening without some form of mass and hopefully peaceful revolt that actually threatens their positions of power. |
You may have to wait a long time.... people are still dutifully clapping.
On the one hand 60,000 deaths compared to say 10? in Sri Lanka or something similar in NZ appears somewhat scandalous. And Germany didnt need to empty its hospitals of sick people, despite borders with France ad Italy because it had 4x as many beds and the people and equipment needed to man them.
60,000 people who all have families - many of whom are grieving AND angry with this lying posturing incompetent government... still leaves 58 million who haven't been affected at all, apart from economically. | |
| |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 16:04 - May 19 with 890 views | Darth_Koont |
| How about a Labour orientated historical debate on 15:44 - May 19 by ElephantintheRoom |
You may have to wait a long time.... people are still dutifully clapping.
On the one hand 60,000 deaths compared to say 10? in Sri Lanka or something similar in NZ appears somewhat scandalous. And Germany didnt need to empty its hospitals of sick people, despite borders with France ad Italy because it had 4x as many beds and the people and equipment needed to man them.
60,000 people who all have families - many of whom are grieving AND angry with this lying posturing incompetent government... still leaves 58 million who haven't been affected at all, apart from economically. |
Personally, I won't compare those extreme numbers. New Zealand for example had a completely different task once the first very limited cases came in. Sri Lanka is isolated too. But Europe and the UK were always going to see a widespread outbreak given the many multiple ways in for the virus and being at the centre of the world.
I think how the government has managed that situation is still poor - and the comparison with Germany becomes relevant. Mistakes have been made which have resulted in thousands more unnecessary deaths but the real problem has been and still is the lack of transparency and honesty. I have no doubt that this is all going to become much more political as we move forward and that's mostly because the government themselves have been managing it politically, rather than as a truly science-driven and non-partisan healthcare crisis. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
