More bad news for Luciana Berger and Labour in Liverpool Wavertree
Yet more bad news for Luciana Berger's campaign to keep Wavertree Labour.
The Mail on Sunday have lifted the lid on more discontent in the Labour party and Unison from elements that were angered by her selection over their candidate Liverpool councillor Wendy Simon.
The story can be read HERE.
As the quote from the Labour party makes clear no one has made an official complaint. And they are not likely to. One member told me that anyone who made an official complaint would be mad to do so.
My understanding of this situation is that it is likely to go nowhere. It is inconceivable that a selection process would be re-run.
If you're wondering why the civil war that started last week is continuing, it is because there is an element that now thinks Labour cannot hang on to Wavertree.
As an aside Miss Berger has launched her campaign website which you can see HERE.
25 Comments
Leave a comment
Dale Street Associates
David Bartlett
City editor of the Post and Echo covering politics, regeneration, and urban affairs.
Read My Posts »
What is this recycled nonsense? 'Daily Mail runs anti-Labour smear' is news? Some facts: Luciana Berger was first reported as 'girlfriend' of Euan Blair by the Daily Telegraph. It was categorically denied, by published letter, the following day - alas for lazy idiot journalists - by Euan Blair! How inconvenient that facts should get in the way of a good story. How utterly in keeping with Tory/LibDem propaganda that the facts are regularly ignored. How typical that the Daily Post should be content to recycle anti-Labour non-stories from the barrel-scraping Daily Mail
im just confused by these new stories. im a card carrying member of wavertree labour party, and i just dont know what these stories are talking about. there is no infighting, there is no discontent, everyone is working hard for luciana and is getting on with the job of beating the lib dems. just because the daily mail says something doesnt mean its true.
Ridiculous story and even more ridiculous headline. You're letting yourself down.
Where is the comment from the candidate or from the majority of the local party that picked Luciana Berger as their candidate?
The Liverpool Lib Dems (for goodness sake) and the Mail on Sunday (ditto) are hardly the oracle. And what is more the idea that someone who happens to know XY or Z, or not, or be their friend cannot thereafter get a fair shake from the national and regional media is in any case .. a right let down.
Truth is, the General Election election is a battle royal between Labour and the Tories and the people of Liverpool remember the Tories last time round. And people also spotted the bogacious Lib Dems using a Conservative style cuts and gimmicks package in virtually bankrupting the city.
Ronnie and Chris,
Thanks for the comments. I can well see that you don't like the slant that they put on the story. The reason for highlighting this was that it shows quite how badly the party has fallen out over the selection of Luciana Berger. You can't really believe that a story like this appearing in the Mail is good for her campaign or Labour?
Strip out the Mail's added in stuff and the salient facts of this case remain.
Fact - there are members of the Labour party who are so unhappy that they are willing to leak to the Mail, or to a rival party that then leaks it to the Mail.
Fact - Peter Kilfoyle had a go at Miss Berger.
Fact - Frank Hont, regional secretary of Unison, has written to the Labour party demanding answers over the selection process (I spoke to Frank today). The Labour party are treating his letter as a "request for feedback".
I could go on, but you get my drift. As for "not being able to get a fair shake from the regional press" the first story we did after her selection (written by me) was all about her with only one line saying the selection process had divided the local party. And then Mr Kilfoyle made his remarks and all this started.
We have a saying which is if you [as in the wider public, politicians, etc] don't do it, we can't write about it.
Whether you like it or not Luciana Berger's selection has split the local party. Could this be a case of shooting the messenger?
david is correct - none of the comments refute the allegations. if true jane kennedy and the labour party are guilty st the very least of a serious lack of judgement in allowing ms berger to stay at the address to which the completed ballot papers were to be sent. if they, or their supporters cant see this then they are seriously adrift.
it seems to me that ms berger needs some friends and good advice at the moment and this wouldnt include mrs kennedy and others behid her candidacy.
David
if you are saying is every member of the local party happy - then no
but isnt split going too far? when the only "split" appears to be Unison(i.e hont- union bigwig and local member I believe) throwings its toys out the pram cos they didnt get the candidate they wanted
why dont you try and get a single other member other than those on the vested intrest unison payroll to say the party is split.
I dont think you would succeed. for instance are you inc Joe anderson in the "split" just cos he voted for a diff candidate? ridicilious.
My Objection to the article was its nasty sneering tone, lazy reference to an "ex" boyfriend which was denied years ago the next day (by said "ex" boyfriend) but is still repeated in a mantra as if said enough times it becomes true.
"civil war" n. A state of hostility or conflict between elements within an organization.
Dave - thanks for coming out and defending your 'slant' on the story.
To try and get across what I think Ronnie and others are getting at: you could have blogged about Peter Kilfoyle and taken a different approach with an alternative headline like "Labour spring chicken ruffles an old bird's feathers" or the Daily Mail article with a headline like "New labour candidate still has traditional Labour enemies". You could have still reported the 'facts' as you've set them out in your post but using a different context.
I don't dispute that it's entirely fitting for you to note some of the impact that Luciana Berger is having; I'm just saying that you have chosen one interpretation when another may be more accurate.
Victor and nobananas,
Thanks for the comments. I can tell you that it is more than just Mr Hont. There are certain elements that are not happy. They will not go on the record because they see little to be gained from that. Ultimately as I've said in a previous post people will get behind Miss Berger because they don't want to see Colin Eldridge win. But that does not mean they are happy about it.
To be honest I thought this had died down until I saw the Mail on Sunday piece.
As for the slant on my blog post, I don't think there was a slant. It was pretty straight. I did not comment on her personal life that was referred to by the Mail and concentrated on the discontent over the selection process. I know many of you don't like the Mail, but I do think some of the criticism being pointed my way is a little unfair.
And I stick by my original headline, a story like that is not good news. There will be Mail readers all over the Wavertree constituency that will have read the story. I still think it is significant that someone from Labour was willing to give so much detail to a paper which is hardly the favoured read of the party.
A fair comment, David, This story isn't going to simply fade away...much to the disappointment of your Labour bloggers. If anything, Wendy Simon should be writing to the NEC to ask for an investigation into the voting process given the obvious conflict of interests which arose due to the Kennedy-Dowling-Berger closed shop. I can't believe they were allowed to get away with it to be honest. Now, considering this debacle, why would anyone vote for Luciana with this cloud hanging over her? Is it too late to call for another ballot organised by their regional office using the good offices of Cllr Louise Baldock as Chair of Labour Party North West Region?
I reckon about 35% of the Wavertree Labour Party aren't happy with result. That's probably 50 people, amazingly the same number that voted for Wendy Simon. You see, that's the snag with democracy - the majority votes one way, a minority the other - hence, you get a division. This only happens where votes are held in the open, and results announced. The LibDems & Tories might try it one day. So yes, the local Labour Party is divided over the selection - naturally. Now we come to UNISON & Mr Hont. The union is not affiliated to the Labour Party, never has been to my knowledge. And there's no reason to suppose Mr Hont has the interests of Labour at heart. After all, he could be a supporter of SWP, or the Tories, or no one but himself. The Daily Mail doesn't care. It's only interest is running smears and personal attacks on Labour. It's quite absurd to define 'good news' or 'bad news' for Labour in terms of the Daily Mail, especially with a story that had scant substance to it. Finally, we now get hints of potential vote-rigging weaseling onto the agenda. Now that would be worth getting to the bottom of. But no one, not even the wretched Daily Mail, has alleged that yet. It remains just a smear. Even as such, it isn't a matter for Luciana Berger, except by association. If the inference of impropriety has any substance, and I doubt it goes much beyond imprudent conduct, then it's a Jane Kennedy story, not a Luciana Berger issue.
Another day, another gaffe for Luciana. She gets another campaign photo op. by signing a pledge at the University Freshers Fair not to raise top-up fees if elected. A couple of hours later, her Labour Government announces a half-BILLION pound cut in University teaching. Likely consequence? Universities will raise top-up fees to cover the gap. Likely result? Poorer students won't be able to go to University - unless of course, they've been to ã10k a year fee-paying schools like Haberdashes Aske's like her very good self. Still, that's what we can expect from an "ambitious" Labour newbie with zero experience.
As a good Labour supporter like myself Ronnie you need to get your facts right- UNISON is one of the biggest trade unions affiliated to Labour and gives it millions of pounds every year!! (see link)
http://www.labour.org.uk/tulo
In this context they have every right to voice their concerns on this matter!
OK, fair enough, thanks. My memory was a bit hazy on that. I think Nalgo wasn't affiliated, Unison's forerunner. The substantive point about Mr Hont still stands though.
ronnie - no it doesnt. hont is a good solid mainstream labour party member. if the party is pi$$ing the likes of him off you have a problem. as for your (lack of) knowledge of unison's affiliation - frankly thats laughable.
What is truly laughable, 'bill oldman', is that you sound exactly like a LibDem 'sock puppet'. Fact: I was largely correct before. Unison is not simply a Labour Party affiliate. It operates a 'Labour Link' political fund, mainly a legacy from its NUPE days. The more widely-subscribed 'General Political Fund' is politically non-affiliated, and contributes to Unison's general non-party political lobbying. That is a carry-over from its Nalgo days. Unison and its officials have little right to try and strong-arm their candidates into MP positions over the democratic will of ordinary Labour Party members.
Ronnie - you are clearly an armchair activist who likes to think they know what they are talking about. By your fulminations you claim to represent the thinking of Labour members but I can guarantee you do not. You are not a real Labour supporter, you are your own personal supporter obsessed with your own opinion.
If you do not know Frank Hont and the support he has given to the Labour movement and the Labour Party as a whole then please do not seek to denigrate him. He has done more for people in this city, working people and for the Labour party than you can ever dream of.
Your lack of understanding of Unison, its role in Wavertree and the Labour Party (Jane Kennedy was a Unison sponsored MP for heavens sake) and subsequent back tracking mark you out as little more than a "gob on a stick" as my mam would say.
You are doing no one any service by speaking the way you do.
SSDD. Another LibDem sock puppet. No debate possible. They simply trade in smear and invective. Nasty party; nasty people.
Hilarious. Ronnie - no one on either side of the political divide takes you seriously. You may see us as nasty. OK. Your call - but I'd rather that than be seen as ridiculous.
Another bad day for Luciana. BBC North-West ran the story about her having no local knowledge, including Peter Kilfoyle's negative comments. If that wasn't bad enough, they repeated her Echo quiz [two out of four] and, then, interviewed Uncle Joe who is now "backing Luciana 100%" [apparently]. What a hypocrite - his leadership inside the Labour Group must be hanging by a thread now.
To compound things, the vox-pops were highly critical of Luciana too. It gets worse. After being asked where she was, Uncle Joe had no idea and couldn't explain why she wasn't giving media interviews. Perhaps this, also, explains why Luciana's website is "closed for comments".
The Liverpool Labour Group could end up tearing itself apart and should have seen this coming. They've got no-one else to blame but themselves.
What will Luciana do after it's all over - why, go back to Camden to try and get elected to the Council, of course.
Is this the best you can do? At least Ronnie was amusing [well, most of the time]. The problem you've got is that you're landed with Luciana Bimbo with no chance of a re-run. She's dividing your party, is a turn-off to traditional Labour voters, is relying on a student vote just when the exams are starting. I could go on but she's doing most of her gaffe's well enough herself. No matter how hard you try, watch and weep as your so-called "promises" gradually melt away.
As a lifelong supporter of the Labour Party,
I for one along with all members of my
family will NOT be voting for them in this
election, Luciana Berger is not someone
I would like to represent my constituency,
I would have hoped for a local person from
a similar background to the people of
Wavertree who understand their worries
over immigration and law and order.
That's ok Jim, I've just checked on the electoral roll, and there isn't a single person registered to vote in the whole of Liverpool with the surname Cotterilol. Nor is there anyone with the surname Cotteril.
You know, if the Lib Dems really want to use made up names, you'd think they'd use 'Jones' or 'Smith' or something normal.
Not for the first time this week, their stupidity sweeps all afore them...
そして次に書き味です。文字を書くときの抵抗が少なく、なめらかです。
Your place is valueble for me. Thanks!?