Labour has announced its Shadow Cabinet and the results have thrown up some interesting match-ups. I decided I’d have a quick look at the ones that caught my eye.
Alan Johnson vs George Osborne
Wisdom vs youth, working class background vs Bullingdon Club, it is not difficult to see why this match-up appealed to ‘left of the left’ Ed Miliband.
It is, inverted snobbery cynicism to one side, a good choice as it keeps Ed Balls conveniently out of the way of the big, financial decisions and also ensures that the next most important job in the Shadow Cabinet is not held by someone with aspirations of being Prime Minister one day. I can imagine Alan and Ed will be an effective team together, if not quite formidable.
Ed Balls vs Theresa May
Theresa will have her work well and truly cut out in parrying Ed’s blows on domestic affairs. Throughout the Labour leadership campaign, Ed Balls showed that he can ‘think wide and deliver deep’. His Bloomberg speech was unquestionably impressive but he pulled the debate out into new areas generally and throughout and if he does the same with Theresa May, pulling her in different directions, he could do Labour a great service in this role. He just has to keep his ambitions on ice for a while.
Yvette Cooper vs William Hague
A bit strange to have one of Labour’s most impressive performers (and female at that) in a fairly invisible slot. Yes, Foreign Secretary is an important position, but Shadow Foreign Secretary is not. There is not much to disagree with between the parties in this field.
Jim Murphy vs Liam Fox
Labour’s highest flying Scotsman Jim Murphy gets a very juicy brief in the Defence role. I daresay he’ll be perceived as doing very well north of the border but not so well south of the border. Jim and Liam are, as far as I can tell, chalk and cheese. What will be interesting is whether Jim will bow to Scottish opinion and campaign against Trident more vociferously given how strongly in favour Liam Fox is, not to mention David Cameron.
Ann McKechin vs Michael Moore
In many ways I have no thoughts on this. I don’t know much, if anything, about Ann McKechin and I quite like Michael Moore, poor performances at BBC Question Time notwithstanding. So this is something of a blank sheet for Scotland, certainly a turning of the page, which may be a good thing as the debate on the Scotland Bill approaches. I suppose both individuals are in favour of Calman so where the dividing lines will appear from is anyone’s guess.
And, well, I think I’ll leave it there. I can’t say I’m too excited by Andy Burnham vs Michael Gove or anyone else on the undercard to be honest.
#1 by Indy on October 8, 2010 - 4:19 pm
“What will be interesting is whether Jim will bow to Scottish opinion and campaign against Trident more vociferously”
Eh? Jim LOVES Trident and so does Scottish Labour. Don’t you know that hundreds of thousands of jobs are dependent on it? In fact every second person in the west of Scotland is in a job only because of Trident. I’m sure I heard Jackie Baillie witter something like that in between bags of cheese & onion crisps and if Jackie says it, it must be true!
#2 by Jeff on October 8, 2010 - 5:09 pm
You’re right Indy. To be fair though, my exact quote was “more vociferously” which any objection whatsoever from Labour would be. It is interesting though that there is thunderous applause at BBC Question Time whenever any panellist suggesting the area but some MPs still haven’t gotten the message. Particularly Scottish ones.
#3 by cynicalHighlander on October 8, 2010 - 10:49 pm
J Murphy will be way out of his league without the backing of Pacific Quay as sneering and laughing will cut no ice down there.
#4 by CassiusClaymore on October 8, 2010 - 4:51 pm
Osborne – Johnson
This match-up tells me that Red Ed is already fighting for his job. Balls is deluded and has been proved wrong about everything, but he is a strong opponent and Ed wants him nowhere near the Treasury brief. Johnson is a lightweight with no business or finance experience and Osborne – a strong intellect raised in a highly successful family business dynasty – will crush him on a repeated basis. This is almost tacit acceptance by Red Ed that the Tory economic policy is correct.
Hague v Cooper
Another resounding Tory victory. To my eye and ear Cooper is a terrible performer and does a great impression of someone who is both arrogant and stupid – a bad combination. Hague is devastating in the chamber and will humiliate her. But she’s too dumb and smug to notice.
May v Balls
Teresa May is no doubt a very nice woman, but a hopeless debater and perhaps a bit dim. It is absolutely beyond me how she got made Home Sec. Balls will unleash the forces of hell, every week, and will break her in no time. Look what he did to the much more intelligent Gove.
Fox v Murphy
A clever bloke who’s actually had a proper career prior to politics and has been studying defence for years versus an oleaginous NuLab careerist who’s never had a job outside Labour, knows nothing about the military, and who helped take us into a disastrous and humiliating illegal war. No contest. They should have left Murphy at Dover House – at least baiting/maligning the SNP played well to his miserable, misanthropic, Mandelsonian ‘skillset’. Instead, Fox will torpedo him. And I will enjoy it thoroughly.
McKechin v Moore
Break out the Champers at SNP HQ. Murphy was an effective attack dog, but McKechin will be no kind of threat. She’s not even famous in her own house. Moore’s not exactly a star either. This will be a very low quality and extremely boring contest. Angus Robertson will be turning cartwheels.
Overall – what a weak Labour team!
I feel much better for having this rant.
CC
#5 by Jeff on October 8, 2010 - 10:38 pm
Good stuff Cassius, a welcome comment.
You may be right about Alan Johnson. I personally lost a lot of respect for the man when he refused to stand up for Gary McKinnon. I reckon his star is in the descendency which could harm Ed.
It would’ve been a risk putting Balls in as Shadow Chancellor but if, it had worked, it could’ve meant a steamrollering of Osborne and Cameron. That is not possible with Johnson but, as I say, the risks are massively reduced and with a long 4.5 years to the next election, maybe that is the most important consideration right now.