From big tent to bivouac?

Yes, Michael Dugher is a gutsy street fighter (as many of his colleagues pointed out yesterday). Yes, too, he is a rare working-class presence at the top of Labour politics; but there is a deeper significance behind his dismissal from the Shadow Cabinet yesterday.

If such a standard bearer from the old right-wing of the party is surplus to requirements, then Jeremy Corbyn’s “big tent” has suddenly become a bivouac.

And given Corbyn’s serial rebelliousness for three decades, to level a charge of “disloyalty” against Dugher for three of four interviews where he has extemporised on the state of Labour politics is fairly astonishing.

To put it mildly, Jeremy Corbyn does not have an embarrassment of riches to choose from.

Fifty per cent of the current frontbench would never get near the dispatch box under normal circumstances. A tough and experienced operator like Dugher should have been viewed as an asset.

Why could Jeremy Corbyn not reach out to him if, indeed, he had crossed a line? Or did he intimidate Corbyn’s inexperienced back office team?

Whatever, it is a sad day – and a worrying development – if a scion of the old Labour right wing – the backbone of the party – is no longer welcome at the top table.


Tags: , , , ,


6 Responses to “From big tent to bivouac?”

  1. Mike Stallard says:

    I am getting increasing worried about Mr Corbyn.
    Not only does this dismissal worry me – Ronald Reagan used to say that when he walked into a room, he was the least clever person there. Mr Corbyn doesn’t seem to get that.
    Secondly the treatment of Mr Danczuk worries me a lot. The girl who led him on was not a minor and what he did was perfectly legal (if very silly). Why is there such a fuss? Who is behind it all?
    When politicians get desperate, they play silly tricks. (Remember the strange death of Dr David Kelly?)
    And his indecisiveness is now really apparent too. That is a luxury which should be reserved for the back benches.

  2. WHS says:

    This article is written as if in some state of surprise (“Why could Jeremy Corbyn not reach out to him?” etc). Jeremy Corbyn is an old-fashioned Trot who wants to purge anyone who disagrees with him, and certainly those who have the temerity to go on the TV and point out the emperor has no clothes – why does this come as a surprise?

  3. Anne says:

    The industrial revolution came from the midlands and the north. Indeed the birth of the Labour Party came from Scotland and Wales. What London might term the provinces. The next leader of the Labour Party will come from one of these areas – the heart of the the Labour Party (hopefully sooner rather than later). We can then start to build a party that truly represents working people – one we can feel proud to be a member. A party which crafts workable policies which challenge the Conservatives. This will be beneficial not just for the Labour Party but for the country. Come on London – join the real Labour Party.

  4. Tafia says:

    The girl who led him on was not a minor and what he did was perfectly legal (if very silly). Why is there such a fuss? Who is behind it all?
    She was a prospective employee and he started messaging her after she had applied and been interviewed. There is such a thing as responsible person.

    the birth of the Labour Party came from Scotland and Wales.
    It was a sickly waif in the verge of death until the Trades Unions took it over as their political wing. Without the Trades Unions it is nothing and deserves to be left to die.

  5. Feodor says:

    Mike Stallard: “…the treatment of Mr Danczuk worries me a lot. The girl who led him on was not a minor and what he did was perfectly legal (if very silly). Why is there such a fuss? Who is behind it all?”

    It worries you, really?

    For the record, what he did may very well not be ‘perfectly legal’. The young lady in question approached Danczuk about the possibility of being employed by him, not to lead him on. Danczuk, the instigator, then responded to this with quite explicit sexual innuendo. How behaviour like this is likely in breach of various employment codes really shouldn’t need explaining to people on a Labour blog of all places.

    Furthermore, you wonder who’s behind it all, in a way that seemingly suggests that you’re hinting that there’s some kind of conspiracy against Danczuk that is being led by his political opponents–presumably friends of Corbyn. Yet the answer is really a lot simpler than that: Namely, Danczuk got burned by the same gutter press he’s spent the last few years courting and taking payments off. No conspiracy, just poetic justice. Live by the sword, die by the sword…

    WHS: “Jeremy Corbyn is an old-fashioned Trot…”

    I bet you couldn’t substantiate that, by demonstrating either what Trotsyist groups Corbyn has previously belonged to, or what parts of the Trotskyist theoretical canon he upholds. You couldn’t substantiate it because it’s nonsense, of course. Corbyn is in fact an ‘old-fashioned’ Labour socialist. But I very much doubt you’re astute enough to understand the difference. Far easier just to rehash popular memes.

  6. nimh says:

    The claim that Corbyn’s charge of “disloyalty” against Dugher “is fairly astonishing” because of Corbyn’s own “serial rebelliousness for three decades” ignores the difference between being a backbencher, as Corbyn was, and being a member of the shadow cabinet.

Leave a Reply