Four XXXX
Martin Kettle in today's Guardian has an interesting piece on the Australian Labor party's decision to install a new leader - a woman, no less, named Julia Gillard.
Here's a extract which highlights the ridiculousness of Labour's electoral college in the UK.
Point is that the Aussies wouldn't give a Castlemaine XXXX about ballotting all these trade union members - who have nothing to do with the election in the first place.
Read the full article on line at - http://www.guardian.co.uk/ - better still buy a copy of the paper.
"Seen from Britain, though, it just makes one weep. Why did Labour here not have the guts and the gumption to do the same thing when it had the chance. Brown dragged Labour down. His leadership perhaps cost Labour around 30 seats on 6 May. Under a new leader – and a better and a more honest one – Labour would have been in a much stronger position to shape the aftermath of the hung parliament, perhaps even forming a coalition itself. But it didn't, and the rest is history.
I would love to know why the Australians have it in their system and their DNA to do something that the British simply cannot do. One major reason is perhaps that the Australian Labor leader is chosen by the party's MPs and not by the more cumbersome but wider democratic process that Labour chose for itself nearly 30 years ago, thus encumbering itself with an institutional inertia factor that hugely benefits incumbents. I'm all for democracy. But hats off to the Australians for knowing what to do and when to do it – and for doing it quickly and well.
Labour here should be so lucky."
Here's a extract which highlights the ridiculousness of Labour's electoral college in the UK.
Point is that the Aussies wouldn't give a Castlemaine XXXX about ballotting all these trade union members - who have nothing to do with the election in the first place.
Read the full article on line at - http://www.guardian.co.uk/ - better still buy a copy of the paper.
"Seen from Britain, though, it just makes one weep. Why did Labour here not have the guts and the gumption to do the same thing when it had the chance. Brown dragged Labour down. His leadership perhaps cost Labour around 30 seats on 6 May. Under a new leader – and a better and a more honest one – Labour would have been in a much stronger position to shape the aftermath of the hung parliament, perhaps even forming a coalition itself. But it didn't, and the rest is history.
I would love to know why the Australians have it in their system and their DNA to do something that the British simply cannot do. One major reason is perhaps that the Australian Labor leader is chosen by the party's MPs and not by the more cumbersome but wider democratic process that Labour chose for itself nearly 30 years ago, thus encumbering itself with an institutional inertia factor that hugely benefits incumbents. I'm all for democracy. But hats off to the Australians for knowing what to do and when to do it – and for doing it quickly and well.
Labour here should be so lucky."
