'It's time to say what most MPs think - we must have a leadership election,' says Graham Stringer, Labour MP

13 April 2012

Challenge: Graham Stringer says enough is enough

In the months to come, Friday, September 12 will be viewed as the beginning of the end for Gordon Brown’s premiership. Certainly, it was the day I knew beyond doubt that the change I have long believed vital for the future of the Parliamentary Labour Party and the country was no longer a matter of ‘if’ but a very definitive ‘when’.

I was listening to PM on Radio 4 when Siobhain McDonagh had the courage to say what many of us have been thinking but all too few of us were saying. She demanded a leadership contest at this year’s party conference. She was sacked from her job as an assistant Government Whip for her troubles but the point was made and I was saddened and I was relieved.

Over the past 12 months the mood in the Parliamentary Labour Party has gone from disbelief, through black humour to despair. It is simply not true to claim that the desire for Gordon to go is not representative of the majority view of the party members. If Gordon believes that, then he is more woefully out of touch and disconnected from our core supporters than I had thought.

Ministers still cannot speak out openly, not if they want to remain Ministers. But the reality is that the majority of Labour MPs agree that Gordon Brown should be challenged. It is only a matter of when. Some take the view that it would be wise for him to hold on until spring, perhaps until after the European elections. Some even think that Gordon should be given a further chance to prove himself.

Personally, I see no benefit in that. Enough is enough. Any longer in charge can only deepen the divisions within the party and the distance between us and the electorate. I would advocate a leadership contest sooner rather than later.

The opinion polls are disastrous, putting Labour’s standing with the country at a 40-year low. It seems quite clear that the electorate have made up their minds about Gordon Brown but can yet be persuaded to vote Labour at the next Election if the party is under new leadership.

It is the leadership contest that we should have held two years ago. I was of the view that Tony Blair’s time was up when the Labour Party met in Manchester in 2006. He had power without the responsibility of fighting the next Election and the party needed a leader who would focus on policies that the electorate would vote for.

But, while I accepted that Tony had become the problem, I never believed that Gordon was the answer. While his record as Chancellor could stand comparison to any previous holder it didn’t seem obvious that he was a natural for the top job. I was hopeful that a selection process would enable the party to renew itself by recognising what had been successful and discarding failed policies. Unfortunately, only Gordon stood.

Colleagues either thought he was going to be excellent or were cowed into not standing for fear of the recrimination that would surely follow on from his ‘inevitable’ victory. The lack of competition was a missed opportunity and one for which the party is suffering now.

I'm being loyal

Today Brown’s supporters describe his naysayers as disloyal, but nothing could be further from the truth. I’m being loyal to the electorate and to the Labour Party. What is the point of being loyal to a leader if the country and the party lose out as a result?

Besides it is hard to swallow an allegation of disloyalty coming from Gordon Brown. He spent ten years being profoundly disloyal to the Prime Minister.

And he remains disloyal as Prime Minister – his office regularly briefs against both the Chancellor and the Foreign Secretary.

I must admit there was a time when I thought I had misjudged Gordon Brown and that my doubts about his ability to lead the party and the country had been unfounded.

For the first three months of his premiership he did well. There was crisis after crisis – the floods, foot and mouth – and he appeared calm, in control, fresh, even likable.

But then the honeymoon period came to an abrupt end.

If I had to pinpoint the moment, it would be his visit to Iraq, timed to coincide with the Conservative Party conference. To me it seemed a blatant and crass use of the Army for party politics and point-scoring. It was distasteful and it backfired.

Since then the failures and mistakes have been too numerous and pervasive to catalogue, among them the disastrous decision to abolish the 10p tax band, compounded by Gordon’s refusal to acknowledge the error and rectify it until far, far too late.

He repeatedly said there would be ‘no losers’ in this reform when in fact there were 5.5 million losers – low-paid workers, the core party supporters.

For a man who had always prided himself on having an iron grasp on the detail of the Treasury it was a devastating mistake. He lost credibility and the Government lost support. It seemed that decisions were being taken not in the interest of the welfare of the country but in reaction to moves made by the Shadow Chancellor, George Osborne and the fear of being outsmarted.

If this served to highlight Gordon’s inadequacies, then the disastrous results of the Crewe and Glasgow East by-elections as well as the local elections crystallised them.

In May, we watched a Labour majority of 7,000 converted into a Conservative majority of 8,000 in Crewe. That’s a 17.6 per cent swing. In Glasgow East Labour’s 13,507 hold was wiped out by a 22.5 per cent swing to the Scottish Nationalist Party which won by 365 votes.

The people are making their voices heard. Believe me, it gives me no pleasure to have been proved right in my fears when Gordon stepped into the place he had so long believed rightfully his.

There must be a selection

But that doesn’t change the reality that Gordon’s time as Prime Minister has not, save for those fleeting early months, been a success. If it is not to destroy the party and our hopes at the next General Election, then there must be a selection.

The time for prevaricating is over.

Gordon’s tenure as Prime Minister was compromised from the start. He cannot escape the fact that his premiership is mired in a ‘selection’ that was nothing of the sort – it was succession and democratic parties should not be in the business of anointing heirs.

We should learn from our mistake and recognise the boost given to the Conservatives by their open selection process.

David Cameron did not go into their leadership contest as favourite but he convinced them, quite rightly, that he would perform well under the pressures of leadership.

This weekend, spurred on by Siobhain McDonagh, more and more party members are coming to the conclusion that a leadership contest is essential if we are to have any hope of avoiding a catastrophe at the next General Election.

The electorate have made their minds up about Gordon and we must have the courage to change to policies that reconnect with them having had the opportunity to vote for a new leader.

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in