You don't have to go back too far and Labour were the opposition party round here. Who says they can't do it again?

There are hints (shock / horror) that a good few would like to reinstate a revised Clause 4! Would that actually help? Well, on this very forum there have been calls to take the railways back into public ownership; simply because the bogus markets don't seem capable of delivering the service we want at costs we can afford. Then take utilities, we might actually be better off with the distribution networks at least being in public hands. Rural broadband might then be more than a dream.

It all depends on the model. In my view, the mistake last time was to equate public ownership with centralisation. This time there are suggestions it should be localised. So far so good. The only hesitation I'd have is our very own local 'public management' experience. Step,forward NTC! However, if words like cooperative and agency were added to the mix - who knows, a brighter future?

Anyway, right or wrong, at least Labour are trying to come up with a real and different vision; not just a different shade of blue and a mine is bigger than yours approach to policy!

What's clause 4?

Something the labour party thought might be good for their image before they became new labour. All about common ownership.

It seems to me that the left wing of the Labour party are looking at the SNP with envy - they are both socialist and popular. Can Labour survive in Scotland without fighting to regain socialist vote that has migrated to the SNP?

Without Scotland can Labour hope to win a UK election?

The big question, of course, is whether a socialist party will ever again be electable in England.

Good point! Your final question is exactly that raised in 1959. It all looks good for the Conservatives today, but just like back then I suspect the foundations are faulty. The similarity is also there for the LibDems, or Tory Lite, who seem set fair to follow the self same course. The SNP is really a protest; and sure, it's taken on the socialist mantle. Nonetheless, as we've seen so many times in the past, once the realities of power hit home and they get to see what economic devolution really looks like that majority will melt away.

Labour's success or otherwise will depend on the mood and attitude of the people. Labour traditionally only seem to win elections when it's 'we' rather than 'me'. Labour haven't been elected since Mrs T re-set the mood, so they've been badge engineering at best.

However, there is this little sign that a real vision is emerging; who knows, we might just be a real choice next time.

Yeah, cos that's a helpful answer.........

Such a political answer. This is why I don't vote.

If you live in certain areas of say Thatcham, it's not worth voting anyway! It seems counting votes properly becomes too hard if there is more than one election going on at the same time.

It is you right not to vote, but if you don't then that is one vote less likely that anything will change.

You know how to use the Internet, a search for 'Clause 4'. Broadly speaking it is in the Labour Party's constitution and it was the clause that gave birth to public ownership: nationalisation. It was revised in the mid 90s and no-longer supported the imperative to maintain public ownership.

That's not saying 'public ownership' us perfect. In some senses, Network Rail (or whatever they call themselves these days) is de facto in public ownership. As are some banks. Trouble is, we've adopted the dumb private sector 'celebrate failure' management model.

For example, fining Network Rail for its abysmal management failure will only hit the operational budgets. I guess the executive won't be repaying bonuses and will be very well rewarded next year too! Real 'public ownership' should have those responsible take an early bath sans any contribution in lieu.

Generally anything you search for relating to politics ends you in a long winded trial where everyone blames everything else instead of actually getting any information.

And thank you for explaining.

Isn't Clause 4 where all Labour Party members, Union Card holders and aspiring political activists at Uni start calling each other "Comrade" again and arrange meetings in smoke filled rooms where they plot how best to return Britain to the Dark Ages?

...ah yes... 70's militant Britain.... that time which very few people look back on fondly and think "The Good Old Days".. wouldn't it be nice to go there again.....

Times have changed and some things will be easier to resurrect than others. They'd have to dig out the old printing plates for the Che Guevara poster for instance, but that's easily done. Working out where to go for a thoroughly miserable holiday in a proper socialist enclave with rationed grey food in grey concrete hotels is more difficult since The Wall came down though.

If you hang around long enough Britain might have a few of those under a Labour Government

I'm sure you could find a number of people that would say that is their life under a Tory Britain too.

Of course in an acknowledgement of the more health conscious 2015 Britain those smoke filled rooms would instead be 'vape' filled rooms....



Yes but they are a heavily subsidised socialist experiment which is maintained in a marriage of inconvenience by their 'significant other' south of the border.... If Salmond and his YES campaign had come out on top I dare say that his vision of a Socialist Scotland would become rapidly less popular once the financial fluff came into sharper focus, especially following the downturn in oil prices on which much of their socialist dream was founded and funded. Whilst the nasty Tory Toffs in England are still in charge it's going to be easy for Sturgeon to keep Scottish Saltires flying from every flagpole.

Labour won't stand a chance up there again until devolution happens (which is inevitable at some stage) and once SNP have had a chance to **** it up on their own with nobody else to blame.

Hitherto, I have been lead to believe that Scotland is a net contributer.

...pfft... According to the Department of Fisheries (Salmond & Sturgeon Division) School of Economics. Cast them adrift and see how much life north of the border will have to change.

The point is, Scotland (assuming oil revenue) has been a net contributer.

Has been, has been. Most of the wealth has come from the oilfields and with Brent Crude at around $50.00 a barrel you can say goodbye to that.

A political party should be looking towards the future, not backwards and Clause 4 represents a time that has long gone. If Corbyn achieves anything then it will be on the same lines as Foot in the 80s (“the longest suicide note in history”). He also will make sure that the Tories are in power for generations.



Clause four is an anachronism; Blair was right to remove it from Labour’s constitution and build for the future.



If Corbyn becomes Labour leader then what next? Diana Abbott as shadow Chancellor and Dennis Skinner as Shadow Foreign Minister? It will also be interesting – if he does win – how many of the current labour shadow cabinet become part of his shadow cabinet. If they do it will destroy any credibility for future challengers to the leadership.

We also mustn’t forget that when we have the next election the Tory’s will have a new leader, while Labour could have Corbyn.

Somewhere deep in the new Labour Party Headquarters there is someone with their finger hovering over the 'Self Destruct' button. Idealist views are fine and dandy whilst sitting on the sideline or whilst holding a placard on some march somewhere, but as a party leader and potentially chief opposition spokesman it's death knell stuff.

His cunning plan to forcibly nationalise the energy companies should be interesting. Especially the one 85% owned by the French state. It would be funny if it wasn't so serious (or is it serious as they will never get elected with him at the helm and Abbott and other loony lefties chanting their support)

I remember when New Labour last got into power, people had written off the Tories much the same way. All New Old Labour have to do is have a few babysitters to look after things until the public get fed-up with the current Raving Monster Tory Party, then they will be in the running again.

New Labour abandoned nationalisation; not Clause 4.

...but it worked for Mrs Thatcher who in 1979 delivered the 1945 Conservative manifesto!

Public ownership isn't nationalisation or centralisation it's simply another way of delivering service particularly where there is no realistic chance of creating a market. No, it isn't idealism either. Several other nation states successfully use various forms of public ownership models, most of the Continental railways are in public ownership, as is energy distribution. Similarly, in that bastion of capitalism, the United States. Even more ironic, the public ownership model in this Country was given life by the Conservatives, with BBC, LPTB, CEB. C & W etc. all arguably quite successful!

Resurrected again in 2015.

Sniffs of public ownership to me (albeit another country). And how much has the 'public' had to shell-out to the banks to prop that industry up?

Yes, but not when Corbyn is in charge and they move to centre ground.

I should have said they revised clause 4.

It wasn't exactly the same and the voters would rather move to the right than the left.

Oops, post error!

Well, with a bit of luck they WILL have him as leader. And if as you say they will get nowhere, that will suit me just fine. We haven't yet got the economy in the right state to enable them to throw it all away again!

It is not healthy for a government not feel threatened.

I like the idea. I think the government and opposition should be different not both trying to be popularist. The Labour Party should be the Labour Party, regardless of whether they think they can get elected or not. Work on the policy, and then promote it. They' e got 5 years after all!

I think that's quite right. In fact, the biggest issue with politics today is that all parties are saying and selling the same thing. There is no choice; so in effect, the winner is the party which had the most physically attractive leader. It's been quite interesting to hear the really quite vapid comments coming from the main stream Labour leadership contenders - no argument, just negative put downs. Exactly the way all three main parties spin along right now. The market forces model they all slavishly follow today is just as much ideology as Clause 4! A real opposition can only be a good thing; proposals properly tested for once.

Exactly, and by allowing Corbyn to become leader they won't be threatened for sometime. This will make them arrogant and that will damage the country.

Yes, but what is the Labour Party in the 21st century? A throwback to the past or a modern working party that deals with today's issues? Blair was right to change the Labour party. He become toxic and hollow. That shouldn't mean that Labour throws the baby out with the bathwater (which they are now doing). The working man has all but gone, now most regard themselves as middleclass. Corbyn and Milliband were/ are just interested in attacking the rich. Nobody gets very far by attacking the rich, what they should have done is concentrate on those that needed help and try to make their lot a bit better. Just offering help to one group, while attacking another only destroyed them and put them out of power for another five years.

That is the trouble with the Labour party at the present; they've got nobody outstanding. Corbyn won't achieve anything worthwhile for the Labour party, in fact he will send it backwards. The same could be said about the other 3 challengers. Nothing is 100%, but I am pretty certain that the Tories will win in 2020. And don't forgot by then they will have a new leader, while Labour with just have one of their dull faces in charge.

Don't write them off completely, they haven't abandoned all their 'Neu Labour' principles. We'll be seeing the next generation soon; the likes of Stephen Kinnock, the Benn sires, Daivd Prescott and even the Blairletts. We are still an aristocracy, and even the people's party know that.

I think the future is coalition, or at very least ministerial secondment. Running a country is homogenising I feel.

Remember the old adage: elections are not won; they are lost. It just needs the Tory sleaze to come back, or the economy to slip. Good governance also relies on a lot of luck. Labour were unlucky with regards the banking crash (and the Tories lucky it didn't land on their watch). I think Alistair Darling was heading in the right direction before the Monster Raving Tories were handed a go.



Talking of Monster Raving Tories; Petra and the Blue Rinsers have been quiet for a while? Good drying weather?

They are having some recuperation time...........not too much flack heading our two local authorities way at the moment..............they are awaiting the next major gaff, not too long to wait I suspect though? 😉

I suppose that as we already have a coalition of political aims and aspirations a permanent de facto coalition is the next step. Arguably, with our present managerial mode of government, this is probably seen as the best way. All the mainstream parties and politicians are so far from the electorate anyway voting in an election is as productive and useful as voting as a little shareholder in a public company. No point in trying to fight it.

It might not be about "abandoning" their principles (or at least some of them) but image. Corbyn's image is old labour and that won't appeal to middle England. On top of that their fist priority will be to win back Scotland, and that won't be an easy task. Then we can add boundary changes to that equation, which will make it almost impossible for them to win the next election in 2020, oh, and did I mention that while Labour will have an old face running their show the Tories will be electing a new face for the next election.

And don't forget Labour's sleaze.

Does that have a different fragrance to the LibDem or Tory sleaze? I've always thought the expression 'we are all in it together' referred to this.

I couldn't agree more. I hope Corbyn gets elected. I don't share Corbyn's politics, but at least he has some, and the right-wards lurch in British politics desperately needs balancing. Labour should represent Labour values, and if no one wants to vote for that then fine. I would like to see a much greater separation between the Tories and Labour to make some space in the centre ground for Liberal politics and a credible centrist party to emerge.

Five years is a long long time. Following what usually happens, the SNP is simply a flash in the pan. Indeed, the cracks are beginning to show even as we speak. Some of the loudest SNP stalwarts were disillusioned Labour supporters; disillusioned with Nu Labor that is. We also have an underlying level,of discontent, right now manifest in the northern conurbations, but also growing in the formerly industrial Midlands. Yes, the Tories have noticed, hence the Northern Powerhouse guff. However, five years out?

I don't forget it but the electorate are stupid; it is one one of the problems with a democracy.

I too have a hankering for a genuine Labour party, but don't really share Simon's optimism that a powerful centrist party will evolve. Corbyn economics will keep Labour out of power until at least 2025, by which time Corbyn will be long gone (I do wonder he will last until 2020).

But what is Labour's values? Shouldn't a political party evolve and move when society changes? Values change, to stay as one was created is just asking for disintegration and oblivion. Even the term working man has evolved. Most now regard themselves as middleclass.

There is nothing wrong with both parties at the centre ground, it is not just about policies, but application of those policies. The only time parties have won is when they've operated in the centre ground. Labour had to move to Thatcher's territory to be accepted by the public on whole. When Labour has moved left it virtually destroyed itself. Electing Corbyn will only make sure that the Tories are in power for the next 10 years or more.

The SNP might be a flash in the pan, but that flash will last for a lot more years to come. And even if the do loose some seats in 2020, they won't get wiped out.

True.