I should coco!
Everyone has words of friendly advice for the Leader of the Labour Party these days - after a summer where Ed's own supporters are distinctly unimpressed at his Zen-like approach to opposition, there are voices on all sides calling variously for the Leader to - 'shout louder', 'grow up', 'bring back the big beasts' and/or 'find some policies that actually appeal to the voters'.
But here's a contribution from Dan Hodges - a Labour supporter - who writes regularly for the Telegraph newspaper whose comments are funny, at least, and who has the advantage of thinking outside the box.
Because when politicians need to come up with a game-changing strategy it's clearly no good to keep thinking in straight lines - they've got to put themselves in the shoes of the voters and speak in terms that ordinary people relate to and understand.
Which is why Ed's promise to clean up Labour's relationship with the trade unions struck such a chord with the public before the summer recess - because the Leader was speaking common sense by saying he wanted to end the machine-like politics that still grip the Labour Party from time to time.
So we shall see what happens over the next month or so because Ed has two big speeches coming up - the first to the TUC's annual gathering in early September and the second to the 2014 Labour Party conference later in the month.
The signs are that the trade unions are working furiously behind the scenes to water down the Leader's commitment that - in future - Labour will only accept money from union members who actually support Labour and positively wish to make a donation to party funds.
Opting in as opposed to opting out - as it were.
Union bosses are wary of this new approach because it empowers individual union members and ordinary Labour Party members - while reducing the collective muscle of trade unions and the ability of union leaders to pretend that they are speaking on their members' behalf - when it comes to party politics.
Which no one believes, of course - even union leaders realise that ordinary members have a 'mixed economy' of political views.
And while it's never easy for people to relax their grip on power - to give up their 'perks' or long-standing privileges - that's the task that Ed Miliband has set himself.
I wish him well.
It’s time for a new Labour guru – Coco Chanel
By Dan Hodges
Labour's new policy chief. (Photo: Rex)
The only route to power for Ed Miliband is to adopt a very simple maxim: less is more
Labour’s Summer of Discontent continues. This weekend, Ed Miliband’s enemies were again making hay at the embattled leader’s expense. Miliband is too “Buddha-like”. He needs to “grow up”. Labour has “massively failed” to make its case.
Actually, that wasn’t his enemies, but his friends: Tom Watson, senior backbencher and former campaign coordinator; Lord Glasman, Ed’s guru of choice; and Lord Prescott, the former deputy prime minister. Caroline Flint, the shadow environment secretary, also chipped in, adding helpfully that though her leader may be unpopular, the voters may not notice come polling day.
The People’s Party is scattering its marbles to the winds. Its poll lead is crumbling. Surveys show that Ed Miliband is viewed as the new Nick Clegg, but without the gravitas and charisma. Fred Goodwin enjoys greater public trust on the economy than his Treasury team.
Some Labour activists and commentators seem stunned by all this panic. They point out that we are still two years from an election, that the cuts are biting and that the Tory brand remains contaminated. But for seasoned Labourologists, there is nothing surprising here. We are just witnessing another of the party’s regular collisions with the British people.
Seriously, what did Labour think was going to happen? That Ed Miliband’s brand of metropolitan liberalism would take the working people of England by storm? That pubs and supermarkets would echo to the excited chatter of people debating the merits of “The New Politics” and “One Nation Britain”? That in the midst of a recession caused by excess borrowing and debt, the voters yearned for a champion who would safeguard the livelihoods of those on benefits by whacking even more borrowing and debt on to the credit card?
It’s time for Labour to face an unpalatable fact. All those people who told the pollsters they couldn’t see Miliband as prime minister were telling the truth.
Labour’s leader is broken. The public have made their minds up about him, and they won’t be changing them this side of an election. It’s not a matter of more time, or getting to know him better, or him shouting louder, or listening harder. He has joined the ranks of those politicians that voters look at and think: “Nah, hasn’t got it”.
Labour has got to stop trying to fix Ed Miliband. They’re not going to win the next election because of him. Instead, they have to figure out how they can win despite him.
That starts with the shadow cabinet. It may sound disloyal, or indisciplined, but they have to stop trying to work through Miliband, and start working around him. If they wait for him to finally make up his mind about policy, hell will have frozen over. They must take a leaf from the book of health spokesman Andy Burnham, and start running with policy initiatives with or without their leader’s blessing.
They also have to start saying “no” to him. Chris Bryant has copped plenty of flak for last week’s immigration debacle, in which he first accused Tesco and Next of neglecting British workers, then had to eat his words before even giving his speech. But it was a shambles made in Miliband’s office. The leader and his team wanted an aggressive intervention on immigration, but didn’t want their own hands sullied. So they got Bryant to act as patsy. If Miliband’s colleagues tell him politely but firmly that they won’t accept the buck when it’s proffered, he’ll stop trying to pass it.
Labour also needs to adopt a new golden rule with Ed Miliband: “The Coco Chanel strategy”. Less is more. Actually, in this case, none at all is more. But total invisibility is impractical. So Miliband’s appearances should be kept to a bare minimum. Unless he has something new to say, he should say nothing at all. And if I was advising him, I’d start to seriously consider whether to throw him into the Coliseum of the election debates.
With the interminable campaign run-in commencing, Labour strategists must adopt a Blitz mentality: “Is Ed’s journey really necessary?” More often than not, the answer will be negative.
Instead, Labour should begin promoting its team, not its leader. Which, in turn, means that Labour needs a serious team to promote. We have been told that in the forthcoming reshuffle, there will be no return for Labour’s “big beasts”. Miliband wants a team “of the future”, which apparently involves promoting people like Rachel Reeves, a former economist, and Chi Onwurah, because she would bring “scientific expertise”. But it’s not a dearth of scientists and economists that Labour is suffering from. It’s an absence of hard-nosed political pugilists. Lynton Crosby is moulding the Tories into a formidable street-gang. Ed Miliband cannot go up against them with a Sunday school choir.
Labour is not experiencing some summer aberration. Once he secured the leadership, collapsing poll numbers, crumbling authority and growing internal discontent were always destined to be Ed Miliband’s inheritance. Now his party is commencing its long slide to defeat in 2015.
There is still – barely – time to arrest it. If Miliband can step back, and allow his party to step up, there’s an outside chance Labour can still win. If the next election is a choice between Miliband and David Cameron, he will lose. If it is a fight between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party, he may yet prevail. Which presents Ed Miliband with a paradox: that his one chance of being prime minister is to make the British people forget that he may one day be their prime minister.
Labour's new policy chief. (Photo: Rex)
The only route to power for Ed Miliband is to adopt a very simple maxim: less is more
Labour’s Summer of Discontent continues. This weekend, Ed Miliband’s enemies were again making hay at the embattled leader’s expense. Miliband is too “Buddha-like”. He needs to “grow up”. Labour has “massively failed” to make its case.
Actually, that wasn’t his enemies, but his friends: Tom Watson, senior backbencher and former campaign coordinator; Lord Glasman, Ed’s guru of choice; and Lord Prescott, the former deputy prime minister. Caroline Flint, the shadow environment secretary, also chipped in, adding helpfully that though her leader may be unpopular, the voters may not notice come polling day.
The People’s Party is scattering its marbles to the winds. Its poll lead is crumbling. Surveys show that Ed Miliband is viewed as the new Nick Clegg, but without the gravitas and charisma. Fred Goodwin enjoys greater public trust on the economy than his Treasury team.
Some Labour activists and commentators seem stunned by all this panic. They point out that we are still two years from an election, that the cuts are biting and that the Tory brand remains contaminated. But for seasoned Labourologists, there is nothing surprising here. We are just witnessing another of the party’s regular collisions with the British people.
Seriously, what did Labour think was going to happen? That Ed Miliband’s brand of metropolitan liberalism would take the working people of England by storm? That pubs and supermarkets would echo to the excited chatter of people debating the merits of “The New Politics” and “One Nation Britain”? That in the midst of a recession caused by excess borrowing and debt, the voters yearned for a champion who would safeguard the livelihoods of those on benefits by whacking even more borrowing and debt on to the credit card?
It’s time for Labour to face an unpalatable fact. All those people who told the pollsters they couldn’t see Miliband as prime minister were telling the truth.
Labour’s leader is broken. The public have made their minds up about him, and they won’t be changing them this side of an election. It’s not a matter of more time, or getting to know him better, or him shouting louder, or listening harder. He has joined the ranks of those politicians that voters look at and think: “Nah, hasn’t got it”.
Labour has got to stop trying to fix Ed Miliband. They’re not going to win the next election because of him. Instead, they have to figure out how they can win despite him.
That starts with the shadow cabinet. It may sound disloyal, or indisciplined, but they have to stop trying to work through Miliband, and start working around him. If they wait for him to finally make up his mind about policy, hell will have frozen over. They must take a leaf from the book of health spokesman Andy Burnham, and start running with policy initiatives with or without their leader’s blessing.
They also have to start saying “no” to him. Chris Bryant has copped plenty of flak for last week’s immigration debacle, in which he first accused Tesco and Next of neglecting British workers, then had to eat his words before even giving his speech. But it was a shambles made in Miliband’s office. The leader and his team wanted an aggressive intervention on immigration, but didn’t want their own hands sullied. So they got Bryant to act as patsy. If Miliband’s colleagues tell him politely but firmly that they won’t accept the buck when it’s proffered, he’ll stop trying to pass it.
Labour also needs to adopt a new golden rule with Ed Miliband: “The Coco Chanel strategy”. Less is more. Actually, in this case, none at all is more. But total invisibility is impractical. So Miliband’s appearances should be kept to a bare minimum. Unless he has something new to say, he should say nothing at all. And if I was advising him, I’d start to seriously consider whether to throw him into the Coliseum of the election debates.
With the interminable campaign run-in commencing, Labour strategists must adopt a Blitz mentality: “Is Ed’s journey really necessary?” More often than not, the answer will be negative.
Instead, Labour should begin promoting its team, not its leader. Which, in turn, means that Labour needs a serious team to promote. We have been told that in the forthcoming reshuffle, there will be no return for Labour’s “big beasts”. Miliband wants a team “of the future”, which apparently involves promoting people like Rachel Reeves, a former economist, and Chi Onwurah, because she would bring “scientific expertise”. But it’s not a dearth of scientists and economists that Labour is suffering from. It’s an absence of hard-nosed political pugilists. Lynton Crosby is moulding the Tories into a formidable street-gang. Ed Miliband cannot go up against them with a Sunday school choir.
Labour is not experiencing some summer aberration. Once he secured the leadership, collapsing poll numbers, crumbling authority and growing internal discontent were always destined to be Ed Miliband’s inheritance. Now his party is commencing its long slide to defeat in 2015.
There is still – barely – time to arrest it. If Miliband can step back, and allow his party to step up, there’s an outside chance Labour can still win. If the next election is a choice between Miliband and David Cameron, he will lose. If it is a fight between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party, he may yet prevail. Which presents Ed Miliband with a paradox: that his one chance of being prime minister is to make the British people forget that he may one day be their prime minister.
