Harry Barnes is someone I have a lot of respect for. He is a knowlegeable chap and although I don’t agree with his analysis on a number of issues, I can usually appreciate his position and understand the logic behind it, although on this one I’m not convinced I do. On Jon Cruddas, Harry said he has placed him third in the ballot (behind Peter Hain and Hilary Benn) and he writes:
“I am not grabbed by the argument that he doesn’t wish to be Deputy Prime Minister. For I would like my vote to influence the determining of who is offered that post; especially when I am not allowed to have a vote to determine who will be Leader/Prime Minister.”
The fact that Cruddas is not seeking to be Deputy Prime Minister, nor hold down a Cabinet portfolio and therefore have a large department to run, has always struck me as being one of his strengths. By now all of the candidates seem to have jumped on to the bandwagon of renewal, but only Jon Cruddas is saying it would be his main job (other than representing his constituents, that is). David Clark, writing in The Guardian makes this very point:
“If there is differentiation that marks out one candidate from the rest of the pack, it relates to the question of what the role of deputy leader should entail. That honour belongs to the outsider, Cruddas. While his ministerial opponents may desire the title of deputy leader for the job security it brings in, making them virtually unsackable, Cruddas is the only one who has detached it from considerations of career status by making it clear that he doesn’t want to combine it with a ministerial position. For him, the position of deputy leader ought to be a full-time post.
This is much more than a dry organisational detail. It goes in many ways to the heart of the public’s disaffection with the political process and with Labour in particular. To put it in colloquial terms familiar to listeners of radio phone-ins, it is the perception that politicians are “only in it for themselves”.
The most attractive feature of Cruddas’s candidacy is that he clearly does not see the deputy leadership of the Labour party as a stepping stone to greater things, let alone the leadership itself, as some may be tempted to think of it. He may never even sit in the back of his own ministerial limousine and seems quite genuinely not to care either way. He appears more at home campaigning on the streets of Dagenham than strolling the corridors of Whitehall.”
Yes, all the candidates seem to have joined Cruddas in talking nebulously about renewal (although it clearly means something different to Hazel than to the rest of the party). Although couple (Hain and Harman) have gone so far as explicitly stating some of the things that need change, I still think I trust Cruddas more than the others to sincerely want change. However, by ruling out DPM or a ministerial brief, he’s ensured he has no chance of implementing change.
Deputy Leader is a non-job. The Deputy’s only power is the threat of resignation – something Prescott used, for instance, to stop Blair’s plans to scrap the minimum wage in 1997 and form a coalition in 1998, and to force a compromise on Education last year. Having only ever been a backbencher and by ruling out a government post, Cruddas won’t have any leverage from a resignation threat.
The problem is not a lack of voice, either for the grassroots or for traditional Labour policies; it’s a lack of power, and Cruddas has made it clear that won’t change if he wins. And we’re not playing a long game here, where we can afford for our agent of change to go with the tide for a couple of years, hoping things will gradually improve under his persuasive influence. If Labour doesn’t change, radically and immediately, the party will lose the next election.
I’ve no idea whether Peter Hain’s “lurch” to the left is sincere or just his latest careerist move, but of all the candidates he’s the one who seems most likely and most able to challenge Brown on policy and organisation, so I’m voting for him first. I’m voting Benn second as he’s open-minded and isn’t a card-carrying Blairite (and he seems to stand the best chance of beating one of the two who are card-carrying Blairites, and who would use the Deputy’s leverage for evil). I’m voting Cruddas third – he seems like a nice guy and I’d like to see him do well, but he was never really serious.
Gregg, I don’t agree that being Deputy Leader of the Party is a non-job. I think Deputy PM is a non-job. I cannot see hoe the Party Leader if they are also PM can possibly devote the time to all the things that need to be done to connect the Party in the country with the Party in Westminster, who almost seem to think of themselves as a seperate party altogether. How is Peter Hain, for instance, going to find the time to act in the absence of the PM (OK – a bit of a non-job) run a ministry, represent his constituents and act as a Deputy Leader of the Party? We all know what will fall off the end.
It isn’t about having an opposing power bloc to Brown – we could choose Jeremy Corbyn if that was what we wanted – but to have someone in the Party whose job it is to ensure that renewal that we all know needs to happen. Don’t say that’s the job of the Party Chair (I know you won’t) … because what has she done towards that end.
My first and last choices were easy. First, Peter Hain. Pity he did not have the guts to stand for Leader. As good a record as any Labour Minister. Knows how to run two Departments at once. A long term theoretrical commitment to libertarian socialism. Last, Hazel Blears. Tough, able, dangerous and completely wrong-headed. We then have a thin field, which can only be filled from the bottom. So fifth is Harriet Hamman as she completely lacks ability. Then fourth is Alan Johnson who only has good lines on Labour organising in Northern Ireland and on Trade Unions in Iraq. Only two left. Hilary Benn edges it over Jon, mainly because he has done a good job on an easy wicket at International Development. Better than Jon’s input as Deputy Political Secretary to Blair and his tucking in behind the whips until the Deputy Leadership job appeared on the horizan. But at least his efforts since then have put him ahead of Alan Johnson. Enough to make him a hero of the “Morning Star” if not for me.
Remember that DPM is a cabinet post appointed by the PM. We are only voting for Deputy Leader and there is no guarantee at all that the successful candidate for that post will become DPM.
In the end, I went for Cruddas at 1 due to policy pronouncements on things like Trident, Unions, Housing and Venezuela. I take Harry Barnes’ point about Hain being restricted in what he can say because of his cabinet post but then you are second-guessing people and I don’t know them well enough to look much beyond what they say at face value. Also went for Benn at 3 as he has good feedback from those who know him well including ex-councillors who were with him when he was leader at Ealing Council. He seems to be open and democractic at least.