Whilst it is difficult to disagree with the main argument of your editorial about the Labour leadership, that "choosing the leader now is pretty daft", issue must be taken over your points about Tristram Hunt (The party has got its leadership election process back to front. Paging Alan Johnson, 21/05/15) Why hasn`t he had a "proper chance to develop his ideas"? How long does it take, or do you mean that candidates should adopt a pragmatic approach, and change their basic political principles to suit the occasion?
Whether Hunt`s voice is one "worth hearing" is a moot point, too, as we have heard enough from him in his role a shadow education secretary to last a while. Didn`t he suggest that teachers take an oath, and that, because they are obviously not inspected enough by Ofsted, should apply to be re-licensed every few years? He showed his complete failure to understand how education works by advocating Performance Related Pay, and continues to insist how "character and resilience" are only achieved in the private sector. As soon as Miliband resigned he was writing in the Observer, attributing Labour`s defeat to the usual causes, behind what Seumas Milne calls "a Blairite agenda"(This New Labour revival could end with a party split,21/05/15).The last things the Labour party needs right now are candidates who lack the bottle to accept the fact that many of Miliband`s more radical policies were popular with the general public!