Why Labour’s Incompetence Has Already Lost It the Election

  1. Home
  2. World
By Harry Phibbs | 4:41 am, May 3, 2017

There has been plenty of focus already in the General Election campaign over the suitability (or otherwise) of Jeremy Corbyn to serve as the UK’s Prime Minister.

Certainly the idea that Britain could have an anti-British leader is pretty strange. Yet such a description of Corbyn is scarcely unfair.

He wants the monarchy to be abolished. He is reluctant to sing the National Anthem. But he has been willing to get to his feet in the past to “honor” IRA terrorists.

He used to wear the pacifist white poppy on Remembrance Sundays. Yet, being unwilling to condemn the violence of his “friends” in such terrorists outfits as Hamas and Hezbollah, he is no pacifist.

Parliamentary democracy, the rule of law, the free enterprise system. None would be safe under Prime Minister Corbyn. In 2012 he advocated abolition of the army.

He would make our nuclear deterrent worthless by making clear to our enemies that he would refuse to use it. His support for Marxist dictatorships around the world will be familiar to all who have read his frequent contributions to the Communist newspaper The Morning Star (admittedly it has a rather niche readership.)

Labour’s response is the unusual one of saying that this election is nothing to do with their leader. “Sometimes the most important question isn’t what makes the best PM. It’s who makes the best MP,” says the party’s deputy leader Tom Watson.

That is not a credible position. It might well be that a Labour MP is attentive at responding to casework and attending social events in community halls.

But at a General Election we are making a decision about who should form the Government.

John Woodcock, the Labour MP for Barrow in Furness, says he would not vote in the House of Commons for a Labour Government to be formed if Corbyn was PM. That is an intriguing point of view. But I have not heard of any other Labour candidate offering such an undertaking.

In any event, it is not as if Corbyn is the only problem. Let us consider those in line for the other great offices of state under his premiership.

John McDonnell would become the Chancellor of the Exchequer. On Monday he was in Trafalgar Square attending a May Day rally. There were Stalinist banners, Assad flags and slogans backing the regime in Venezuela. It was, let’s face it, a Communist rally.

At least he is being consistent. In 2013 he said: “We’ve got to demand systemic change. Look, I’m straight, I’m honest with people: I’m a Marxist. This is a classic crisis of the economy – a classic capitalist crisis. I’ve been waiting for this for a generation!”

Emily Thornberry would become our Foreign Secretary. She learnt the ropes under Michael Mansfield. A fellow Champagne Socialist, she specialised under his guidance in “human rights” law.

Their idiosyncratic interpretation of human rights is indicated by Mansfield being a great favourite of the Cuba Solidarity Campaign, and also President of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers – an outfit once on an official Labour party “proscribed list” because of its Communist links including involvement in the “International Association of Democratic Lawyers” – a Soviet front organisation.

It was only in 2014 that Thornberry was sacked by the then-Labour leader Ed Miliband for her snobbish comments about a “white van man” displaying the England flag.

Then there is Diane Abbott. She would be the Home Secretary. Back in 2013 she was sacked by Miliband after her racist comment that: “white people love playing ‘divide & rule'”.

She has now come up with a hopeless muddle over Labour’s costings for police numbers. The figures are even more absurd when the reality is considered over the national bankruptcy that a Labour Government would herald.

So, after Ed Miliband was much derided for being a disaster, we now have a team so hopeless that he sacked them or refused to offer then jobs in the first place.

Labour’s problem is not just about Corbyn. It is the whole incompetent, unpatriotic Marxist outfit. The crisis for the party goes much wider than Corbyn. Those who vote Labour should face up to the implications of what they are voting for.