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!
No comments:
Post a Comment