The decision by Labour’s national executive committee to close the gate early on nominations for the party leadership shows that old New Labour habits die hard. The effect is to ensure a battle of the established hierarchy, squeezing out a wider field of possible candidates and severely limiting the scope of the vital debate on Labour’s future that is needed.
NEC member Peter Kenyon describes it as a “coup”. His attempt to open up a simultaneous contest for the deputy leadership, to which Harriet Harman is clinging limpet-like, was disdainfully quashed. Only if 52 members of the new parliamentary group of MPs sign up in support for a challenger will there be an election, and that is not looking likely.
Attention is focusing on Jon Cruddas, who,in ruling himself out of the leadership race, stressed that there was an important job to be done within the party – seen as an application for a job that either does not exist or is not vacant. He said he is “determined to play a full role in the re-invigoration of a party that stands as the best hope for the people of this country.” This ignited calls amongst the progressive political blogosphere for a deputy leadership election.
Regular Tribune contributor Anthony Painter has emphasised the need for such a contest, stating:
“Party renewal is an ongoing sore within the Labour Party. The party needs to be more diverse, democratic, open and engaged. Jon Cruddas’ statement last night seemed to be a hint in that direction, and clearly the leadership race needs the strongest and most diverse feel possible. My sense is that there should be a deputy leadership race and Harriet Harman should stand as a very strong candidate in that, and the leadership election as well.”
Sunder Katwala, General Secretary of the Fabian Society, agrees that Harman should run for both positions, stating that the party would “suffer from an all male leadership contest.”
He states:
“Whatever she does decide about the leadership, I think she should take the step of opening up the deputy leadership by formally resigning the post and announcing she will seek nomination again, to mark the fact that a change in leadership and the party leaving office after 13 years marks a different political era. She would clearly be the strong favourite for the deputy leadership.
“Personally, I also think we ought to introduce two deputy leadership roles: that would be the only way in the long-term to guarantee that, whoever was Leader, we could always have some gender balance in our top team, which I think is an important expression of Labour values of gender equality.”
But would Cruddas, who virtually anointed Harman in the last leadership contest want to challenge. And what would it do for peace and harmony between the Harman household and that of Cruddas and wife Anna, who works with Hattie?
To read further commentary by Painter and Katwala on the merits of a deputy leadership contest, use the links below:
http://www.nextleft.org/2010/05/cruddas-does-want-to-run-for-deputy.html
http://www.anthonypainter.co.uk/2010/05/12/labour-should-have-a-deputy-leadership-election-too/
