image There must have been some occasional doubt even in Diane Abbott’s own house that she was a serious contender for the Labour leadership. Now that it’s over it’s fair to say that it had three principal results.

It very effectively scuppered John McDonnell’s opportunity to take a much more radical message and track record into the party and the unions. Obviously this was a completely unintended consequence for those who egged Abbott on.

Her profile is a bit higher now and this probably won’t adversely affect her income from TV appearances.

It has shone a spotlight on life inside many local Labour Parties. In her own constituency she received 20.55% of the vote. She was beaten handsomely by David Miliband who got 34.8% of the vote there. Ed got 71% in his. There are a couple of conclusions we can take from this. One is that your base inside a party isn’t that strong when only one person in five of those who have most contact with you are willing to vote for you. The other is that one person in three in that constituency is an unreconstructed Blairite and Hackney used to be quite left wing. God knows what the other CLPs are like. In 112 David Miliband received more than 50% of the vote.

The votes from the unions were revealing. Diane Abbott won  10% from Unite; 7.45% from GMB; 10.3% from Unison. Ed Miliband did very well winning 42.63% from Unite; 42.05% from GMB; 34.3% from Unison and trounced his brother who got 19.57% from Unite; 22.61% from GMB; 23.68% from Unison. These are impressive margins.

Miliband’s victory and that of Ken Livingstone were two big setbacks for the Blairites. Diane Abbott seems to think that it could also be a career opportunity and used a slot on BBC’s Question Time to remind Ed just how great she thinks he is. Coincidentally she is also standing in the shadow cabinet election as "the voice of the cities".

Quite what this means isn’t altogether clear. She thinks cuts are not a good idea but says "Of course there is no question that we would have had to take tough action on the deficit" which most likely translates as "of course we’d make big cuts too but a bit more slowly and I’m happy to go along with that if it gets me a promotion". Whatever else it is you can’t honestly describe it as a reluctance to making the working class pick up the bill for the capitalist offensive.

Maybe there was a fourth result of Abbott’s candidacy. It makes it damn near impossible to argue with any conviction that she presently sits on the left of the Labour Party. It’s a shame in a way. The party has had a big influx of new members who are joining it as a way of fighting for their class against the Tories and many of the union members who voted for Ed Miliband were thinking the same thought.

 

 

 

11 responses to “Diane Abbott – a candle blowing in the wind”

  1. I don’t think this is right; “It very effectively scuppered John McDonnell’s opportunity to take a much more radical message and track record into the party and the unions. ”

    If you remember Diane was only on the ballot paper with the help of MPs who had no intention of supporting her but knew that not having a woman on the ballot paper would make Labour look very elitist.

    John McDonnell could not count on those same MPs giving him a leg up and so would not have been on the ballot paper and – so – would not have had the opportunity to take any message into the party or unions in any meaningful sense if Diane had not stood.

    Like

  2. Things are moving on in the Hackney N & Stoke Newington area: http://tinyurl.com/35uperu

    Like

  3. “…would make Labour look very elitist….”

    I think the word you’re looking for here is “sexist” (men don’t constitute an ‘elite’…)

    McDonnell wasn’t going to be on the ballot, irrespective of Abbott standing.

    Undoubtedly, she ran a rubbish campaign (though even so, still managed to beat both Balls and Burnham in the CLPs and the Unions). Undoubtedly she grates on some people – perhaps especially in her own constituency – who don’t like the self-promotion, identity politics, sofa-sharing &c. Undoubtedly, she did not stand on the transitional programme. Are you surprised? She’s a Campaign Group MP, for heaven’s sake – not Subcomandante Marcos. So why the vitriol?

    Anyhow, the real mystery of the campaign is why Burnham stood. Answers on a postcard please….

    Like

  4. Tragic that John McDonnell could not run!

    Like

  5. I meant elitist – given the nature of the empty suits on the menu, but although I wasn’t looking for the word sexist that would be true too.

    The key point however, that Liam is wrong to say Abbott kept McDonnell off the ballot, I think still stands.She’s not the enemy here.

    Like

  6. Perhaps the killer stat is that overall Abbott recieved
    less than 10,000 votes from CLP,

    9314 OR less than 8% of all CLP votes cast
    put another way ED, Balls, Burnham and David got more than 92% of CLP votes

    How far right can Labour go?

    Like

  7. “I meant elitist – given the nature of the empty suits on the menu”

    Then you also meant that not having someone other than an empty suit would look elitist, rather than not having a woman…..

    I think we’ve seen how far right Labour can go, having lived under Blair and then Brown governments. Dianne Abbott’s showing is not exactly a surprise. Everyone who is commentating on it now – what was your expectation prior to the leadership election? Dennis Skinner declared for David Miliband for crying out loud…..

    And presumably members of the hard and organized left who used to be in the labour party understand their leaving both as response and contributer to the decline of the left in labour? And what’s actually behind all the bluster about bankability and opportunism (which I find staggering….in the week that media-loving Tommy Sheridan is in court for being a total idiot, and of course George Galloway would never be interested in his TV profile and Ken Livingstone doesn’t care how much he commands on the after dinner speaking circuit….)? Underneath the faux surprise at the poor showing and the snarks, is laying of the foundation for justifying continued orientation away from Labour in a period when Labour is more likely to move left than it has been in years. So why not actually have that discussion?

    Like

  8. If one relies on personalities to lead, rather than building a movement based on the self organisation of the working class, then this is the mess one gets into.

    John never has sought any form of personal gain at the expense of the movement. Nor has he compromised principles for status.

    The demise of the Labour Left, along with many defeats and set backs in the 80’s reflects the historic defeats of the Miners Strike, which were aided by the betrayals of the Kinnock leadership at the time.

    United fronts with Labour members , cllrs, MP’s etc willing to oppose the ConDem attacks yes, entryism for its own sake no. Now is not the time. Do not be quick to over exagerate the so-called Left trends of Ed and co.

    Like

  9. Jim , I don’t think anyone is suggesting that Diane Abbott is the enemy in the sense that George Osborne or Jamiroquai is. My point was that nothing in her behaviour before, during or after the election significantally put her to the left of the other candidates. Her pleading for a job from Miliband on TV was pitiful.

    It os obvious that the Labour Party in the next year or two isgoing to change its membership profile significantly. Some of the Blairites in the CLPs will jump ship and people who want to use it to fight will join it. You’d have to be daft not to have an orientation to them as party members. Whether that justifies joining is quite another question.

    And a trawl on this site for my views on brother Galloway’s screen and stage career will show less than fullthroated enthusiasm.

    Like

  10. Liam: I did not find Abbott an inspiring candidate, but when I went to see her speak at the Camden town hall hustings she *was* clearly to the left of the other candidates on immigration, social justice, the war and the economy – on that occasion she also spoke well.

    However, the same goes for her as the other candidates – it was just talk anyway, all about snip and pitch.

    Do you still think that she scuppered John M’s chances? Given she didn’t keep him off the ballot I’m not sure how she did that and that was the bit I was specifically querying.

    Like

  11. Liam, i like your comment about jamoroqaui,pity that the voters did nor see that.But he!h, thers always the next time if you stick around.

    Like

Leave a reply to Loving Dalston Cancel reply

Trending