LEADERSHIP CANDIDATES - WHAT A FABULOUS BUNCH !

What a fabulous choice Labour Party members face as they look for a replacement for the bearded wonder, Jeremy Corbyn.

Corbyn's ultra-left wing agenda was roundly rejected by the electorate in the recent general election but at least some of the potential candidates to take over at the helm seem to have closed their minds to this. In particular, Clive Lewis seems to be hell bent on running a campaign which could even be more extreme than Corbyn's although his supporters seem to be few and far between. Rebecca Long-Bailey, Corbyn's all but anointed successor, is also an adherent of the same Marxist policies as her mentor but seems to be somewhat more acceptable to her peers, Lord knows why. A vote for Long-Bailey would surely be nothing but a vote for a Conservative victory in 2024 or whenever the next general election takes place.

Whatever Emily Thornberry thinks is probably irrelevant as she appears highly unlikely to attract the support of more than a handful of her fellow MPs and MEPs; clearly, they've rumbled her and realised that her arrogance and snobbery render her an impossible candidate. Jess Phillips, the loud and somewhat foul-mouthed MP for Birmingham Yardley since 2015, has been no supporter of Corbyn and appears to have more support than Thornberry but can anyone really see her as a potential Prime Minister ?

The MP for Wigan since 2010, Lisa Nandy, may not have a particularly high profile but she does appear to be well respected. Her support amongst fellow MPs and MEPs is very similar to that recorded for Long-Bailey and Phillips although she is a very different character. As an opponent of Corbynism, Nandy has apparently spoken well at gatherings of the party faithful and made a very good impression; she actually seems to have the beginnings of a plan for restoring the party to a more sensible and acceptable pathway.

Finally, there's the front runner, Keir Starmer. Starmer has spent the last few years sitting alongside Corbyn on the Labour front bench but now wants everyone to believe that he's not really a 'Corbynista'. It is clear that he's a strong opponent of Brexit and has no record of opposing Corbyn's policies, other than his resignation from a shadow cabinet position in 2016 when there was a significant revolt against the leader. However, his subsequent return to the shadow cabinet suggests that the resignation was far more about positioning himself than about any principals that he may have had. What looks like hypocrisy is backed up by his acceptance of a knighthood in 2014 while apparently wanting the consequential title of 'Sir' to be omitted when he's addressed. A serious case of personal ego conflicting with public persona and career ambitions, perhaps.

What a bunch. Not a statesman, or stateswoman, amongst them, not even a player with any real charisma or political weight. Thank God the choice between them isn't mine to make.

CORBYN'S VISION IS TERRIFYING.

Now we know.

Announcements from assorted senior representatives of the labour Party over the last couple of days have confirmed that, if elected to government, Labour would take our country back to the dark days of the 19660s and 1970s. In addition, they also seem to be joining in with the demand for a second referendum on the subject of Brexit, presumably with the expectation that it would reverse the original democratically obtained view of the electorate.

It appears that Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, more properly now seen as a Marxist-Leninist cabal, would set out to destroy our economy with attacks on business and anyone deemed to be 'wealthy'.  Handing out shares to company employees may be a laudable move, but requiring all companies to have a third of its Board members drawn from the workforce is not; neither is stealing 10% of larger company's share capital in order to expropriate vast sums in dividend payments. In truth, it wouldn't really be members of the workforce who were so elevated, it would be trades union representatives whose interests would be unlikely to coincide with those of either investors or the companies concerned. Their demands would be for higher wages, shorter working weeks, longer holidays and more time off for a variety of social reasons - maternity, paternity, bereavement, moving home and heaven alone knows what else. All of this while also opposing mechanisation, automation and job losses. The result would be lower productivity, declining profits and poorer companies, leading to less investment, falling share prices and, ultimately, poorer returns for pension funds and poorer pensioners. Companies would flee from the UK in droves and it wouldn't be long before the pound sank to levels never previously seen, tax revenues would decline dramatically, state borrowing would rise in equal measure, and Britain would be bankrupt. Anyone who doesn't believe this scenario need only look at the unholy mess created by the Labour governments of the 60s and 70s which ended with Denis Healey taking a begging bowl to the IMF while refuse piled up on our streets and bodies remained unburied.

In addition, Labour is promising to nationalize anything that moves, from railways to water; helpfully, this will, apparently, be possible without incurring any costs, meaning that the current owners may well be left somewhat out of pocket. They will also take back central control of our schools system, presumably in order to assist their pursuit of equality by further 'dumbing down' of the syllabus and exams; no child will be allowed to leave school without a mandatory 9 A* grades.

Labour will make sure that all of the trains run on time, probably by employing hordes of workers to adjust station clocks as necessary. Everyone will be absolutely equal whether male, female or intersex, homo-, hetero-, bi- or any other sexual, black, white, yellow, green, ginger, abled or disabled, always remembering that such equality will not apply to conservatives, liberals, the wealthy, tax dodgers, the academically bright, anyone who went to grammar school or is heard to criticize the government. We will all be free to do whatever we like as long as we have a permit for it.

This will be a Socialist Utopia in which some are more equal than others. and anything that the government says will mean whatever the government says it means. Whoopee !!

WHO WOULD DEPOSE CORBYN ?

It is quite remarkable how so many senior figures in the Labour Party, who vilified Jeremy Corbyn over the last couple of years, have not only failed to continue their vilification since the general election but have actually made noises of support. Why might this be /

Way back in 1981, Labour won elections for the Greater London Council under a moderate leader, Andrew McIntosh. Within a few hours of the election, McIntosh was ousted by Ken Livingstone and his 'hard left' coterie of supporters who had been working for such a revolution for several years. London became a left wing stronghold.

One now wonders if we might be heading for 1981 in reverse. The possibility of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister is now a real one and yet many of his policies can find little favour with senior party members who have, so far, remained deafeningly silent. A Corbyn premiership would be difficult to maintain given that many of his own backbenchers would be reluctant to support him and an immediate challenge would surely be likely.

Who would be at the forefront ? Some have suggested that Yvette Cooper is favoured by the Blairite wing of the party, but would David Miliband consider returning or, even and horribly, does Tony Blair himself have thoughts of coming back ? Whichever took over, the country would be plunged into months, at least, of turmoil.

Still more reasons why the Conservatives cannot afford to either let Theresa May go or to risk another election anytime soon. They must remain united, whatever they might think.