Guardian Unltd: Labour MPs put Blair on notice

[Jack Rabbit]

From the Guardian Unlimited (UK)
Dated Saturday September 27

Labour MPs put Blair on notice
Guardian survey reveals discontent
By Nicholas Watt and Larry Elliott

Tony Blair is facing widespread dissatisfaction among Labour MPs who are calling on the prime minister to introduce radical changes to his leadership style if he is to avoid a damaging loss of support.
On the eve of his tenth conference as Labour leader, a Guardian survey of backbench MPs found overwhelming opposition to the controversial policy of university top-up fees - and growing questions about Mr Blair's premiership itself.
As the prime minister braces himself for several union-inflicted defeats at the conference, which opens in Bournemouth tomorrow, the Guardian found that just under a quarter of MPs surveyed would like Mr Blair to quit Downing Street immediately . . . .
A survey of 108 MPs is not comprehensive because there are 409 Labour MPs, 262 of whom are backbenchers. But it covered a wide range of views which are likely to be examined by Downing Street, which is acutely aware of the need to improve consultation. The key findings include:

Just under a quarter (24) said Mr Blair should go now. Another significant tranche (25) want the prime minister to move in a peaceful transition, either before or after the next election. But just over a quarter (29) offered unconditional support, with a further nine keen for him to stay if he changes his style.

Read more.

[T_i_B]

1. Not really

When it comes to the crunch "new" labour MP's are on the whole a dreadfully sycophantic bunch who will toe the line from here to eternity with Blair. They are the puppets and Blair is the puppet master.

Even if Westminster is the mother of parliaments Blair has his hand stuck right up her skirt.

[AP]

2. They probably just remember what it was like to grow up in a UK dominated

by Tories and they appreciate what Blair's doing to prevent that from happening again.

[Jack Rabbit]

3. DLC logic

Vote for us; we're not that hot, but better than the alternative.

It's a black-and-white fallacy. There's no reason to buy it.

[AP]

4. However, Labour is MUCH better than the Tories

Employment is at a record high (and that's during a global downtunr) and wages are up for civil servants (and those are middle class people).

Part of the reason Blair's in Bush's crosshairs is because he is changing British society from one that benefits the rich to one that creates an empowered middle class, and into one that is less likely to vote Tory (provided the economic and government reforms continue).

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. Actually, the middle class has benefited the least

from Blair's government, in terms of income. See http://www.ifs.org.uk/inequality/bn33.pdf (the Institute for Fiscal Studies are probably the most respected, independent analysts of the British economy).

While the Gini coefficient has only gone up slightly (a lot less than it did under Thatcher, but it stayed fairly steady under Major too), the middle quintiles have actually benefited the least. However, the growth was fairly evenly spread across the quintiles - more so than the previous 2 PMs (ironically, Major's government was worst for the richest). What Labour has achieved is a fairly steady, evney distributed growth. But it's hardly Robin Hood territory.

Your thesis that Bush is out to get Blair still seems remarkably lacking in evidence.

[AP]

6. Under the tories, there was no middle class in Britain.

Raising the incomes of the working class is creating a middle class.

If US foreign service diplomats stationed in Greece, the CIA, logic and my own eyes aren't sufficient evidence, I don't know what is.

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Thanks, AP

That's the best laugh I've had from DU this week!

[AP]

8. You're going to have to send my your email so that in 10 years when

the truth becomes obvious I can send you an "I told you so" email.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. It's your knowledge of Britain that's laughable

If you think that there was no middle class under the Tories, and that Blair has created one, then you need to read something about Britain in the past 30 years.

If any one person can be said to have created the current British middle class, it's Thatcher. She cut the power of the trade unions (both previous Tory and Labour governments were brought down by wide-spread strikes), and sold off local council-owned houses to their tenants, to increase the property owning class that she knew voted for the Conservatives more than Labour. It worked, until Blair worked out that Labour needed those votes too - and by a combination of getting rid of the more left-wing policies (theoretical and real), and the Tories' incompetance, he got them.

Your interpretation of the CIA analysts is more speculative than the WMD dossiers; if you have any links to the diplomats' theories, I'll take a look at them.

[AP]

10. If you think Britain had a middle class, you don't know enough about US

granted, the decreasing salaries and increasing debt load of the US middle class is making it resemble the British, uh, middle class under Thatcher and Major living off their overdrafts, and having no real voice in society.

The CIA guys made an admission against interest, which is good evidence in my book. The diplomat's statement is the most inculpatory. I'll try to find it.

[AP]

11. Here's the link for US Amb. Kiesling's comment about Bush sabotaging Blair

p://www.wamu.org/dr/2003/drarc_030310.html

This will be an interesting test of my memory.

[AP]

13. At about 27 minutes...

Kiesling says Bush is hurting Blair, doesn't know why. Doesn't say "sabotaging"...I admit I'm reading between the lines, but I think it's obvious, personally.

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. Is there a word for being paranoid for someone else?

Because if there is, you're it, on behalf of Tony Blair.

I'd like to know your definition of middle class. If it's based on lack of debt, then it's worth pointing out that consumer debt is currently at a record level in Britain. I can't find a division of that debt into any sections of society.

My definition would include income (must be in the middle 3/5ths of the population; a British definition would probably be the 40-80% bracket); expecting to own your own home (with or without a mortgage); a reasonable expectation of your children going on to higher education; and unlikely to be a member of a trade union (though that can have some exceptions - being a teacher is a very 'middle class thing').

[AP]

17. Molly Ivins says about Bush, the problem with him is that

everything he does makes you feel like a paranoid conspiracy theorist (or something like that). I heard Krugman quote her to explain his own feelings.

If I feel the way Molly and Paul feel, I'm probably in good company.

The things that create overwhelming consumer debt in the UK are the things Blair is trying to fight -- low wages and the power of the banks.

[AP]

18. Double post deleted.

[rman]

12. most Brits are on to the fact that Blair isn't Labour

-

[T_i_B]

26. Bollocks

Tony Blair's a Tory
He wears a tory hat
And when he sees a hospital he says "I'm bombing that"

[AP]

30. Tony Blair actively endorsed Al Gore.

When did he become a Tory?

[Jack Rabbit]

31. So what?

He also endorsed G. W. Bush's illegal colonial war and repeated the lies invented in the White House and Pentagon to drum up support for it. He even elaborated on those lies.

Blair is a war criminal who should stand before an international tribunal with Bush. The fact that he's a kinder, gentler sort than Maggie Thatcher -- or Bush himself for that matter -- is a red herring.

[AP]

32. So, I'm saying that a guy

who was so tight with Clinton, who practically endorsed Gore, who is raising employment and wages in the UK might be doing something viz Bush which you're misinterpreting.

Just a theory.

He actually tried to talk Bush out of attacking Iraq (according to Kupchnak's End of the American Era, at about page 220).

[Voltaire99]

14. Question about Gordon Brown

Although I read the Guardian daily and am fascinated by British politics, I can't discern whether Brown as PM would prove an equal or less of a toady to Bush than the fawning Blair. Is it too early to say - e.g., depends upon collapsing public view of Blair's war role?

Any insights?

[Jack Rabbit]

16. The problem is Blair's credibility

Gordon Brown had a shot at becoming leader of the Labour Party in the nineties, but stepped aside in favor of his friend Tony Blair in the interests of unity.

Brown might have done the same thing as Blair had he been PM since September 11. If that were the case, we would be enjoying watching Brown stew in his juices and wonder what kind of replacement Blair would make.

What a new British PM would be expected to do is reverse the alliance with Bush and distance Britain from the PNAC agenda. Blair can't do that. He's too closely identified with his blunders. Brown, regardless of whether or not he would have made the same mistake, can.

Personally, I'd rather see Robin Cook take the helm, but I don't think it's going to happen.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. less, I'd say

He's always stuck to economic policy, so it's a bit difficult to say. He was very left-wing in his youth, and his only foray into foreign policy has been in favour of third world debt reduction - whether in practice he's helped that is opened to debate. If there's any American he'd suck up to, it's Alan Greenspan - for him, a steady economy is vital (though again I suppose it's debatable whether Greenspan has achieved that overall).

[Voltaire99]

21. Thanks to all for your replies (n/t)

[AP]

20. Read Greg Pallast...

in TBDMCB he often has arguments framed like this: "Blair is bad because Gordon Brown is a shill for big business."

[LivingInTheBubble]

22. Amazing thing on TV

Watching sky news coverage of todays anti war protests.
George Galloway suggests the burning of bush on Bonfires rather than the traditional Guy Fawkes. Ken Livingston Mayor of London comes on saying that most of London agrees with him and lists Bushs history (going awol,insider dealing etc..). Criticises israeli occupation and general anti-arab sentiment being cultured in the west. He says that Bush cannot expect a warm response.

[sspiderjohn]

23. so what ARE the odds he'll be dumped?

nm

[LivingInTheBubble]

24. IMHO

Starting to look much more likely. The unwashed masses are starting to get restless, no longer just the compassionate intellectuals.

[AP]

25. I got an email from a "compassionate [English] intellectual"

who doesn't like Blair. The first time I met this person, I listened to her insulting Scottish accents at great length. She's very well-known in her field.

[LivingInTheBubble]

28. do you have a point?

I can't find one anywhere in that post.

[AP]

29. My point is that I'm not impressed with

what passes for criticism of Blair from the intellectuals. At least one I know doesn't really care much about class differences, which would explain why she'd sacrifice a PM who is raising wages for the bottom two quintiles, reducing unemployment, and who is breaking down class distinctions, just because she doesn't want to confront the fact that Britain had no influence on Bush's decision to invace Iraq, and because she doesn't understand European politics and economics, and can't see what would have happened had Blair stayed out.

[T_i_B]

27. It's not likely that "new" labour will dump Blair

"new" labour is little more than a Tony Bliar fan club. Any dissent within party ranks is dealt with very harshly and the bulk of the party's MP's are brainwashed sycopantic brownosing fools with the look of recently violated meerkats about them.

"new" labour has invested too much in Blair. The chances are that they will go to the wall with him.