I see that the Guardian today has interview Ed Balls, the scariest member of the Government and the Chancellor Brown never had. In it he argued that Labour is in danger of letting in the Conservatives by fighting themselves. The bout of infighting means that Labour are not scrutinising Cameron and his party.
Balls, dare I say it, is correct. He is also correct in his assertion that parties that are divided do not win elections. Asking what the Conservatives stand for is a perfectly legitimate question. With the greatest of respects to the Conservatives, being nice and cuddly does not constitute a political programme. Even Blair in his cuddliest days in opposition had some policies, limited though they were. It could be argued that with little of substance in Tory policy, there lurks a bigger danger of old style Toryism waiting to raise its ugly head when it feels the time is safe.
All of this is of course being overlooked whilst Labour engages in its own suicidal civil war. Perhaps the focus on the divisions helps mask the fact that few seem to know what Labour now stands for, reflecting the outlook people have on the Conservatives. Maybe there is method to Labour's madness after all!
"Clinging to Power" is hardly a great campaign slogan. It didn't work for John Major in the mid 1990s and there is no reason for believing it will work for Labour now.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device