Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.
Tony's back in town . . .
Tags: Ed Miliband Labour Tony Blair Iraq
Let's see if this vacuous comment gets past the moderator!
It did. Wonder why my real comments did not!
What is it with the British centre-left, seemingly determined to destroy their (few) heroes ??? Blair won 3 general elections & I certainly remember the 'Blair years' as a reasonably happy & financially secure time ('cool Britania'....no longer!)
He definitely lost it on Iraq, in my view, not on a moral stand point, but having missed that GW Bush was a political ape & waiting for a 2nd UN resolution (which would have in time come) would have been a far better option, + there was no exit strategy WHAT SO EVER. One costly mistake, but Labour I fear will be a long time waiting for a worthy replacement
Surprizing number of Vatican converts on this run-must be the god-spin.
Utter nonsense Mehdi, and some surprising observations from somebody so on the ball.
Like him or loathe him, Blair was an extraordinary politician. He brought Labour to power and kept us there for over a decade by completely dominating the political scene. Low-turnout, imo, was a recognition of that. The idea that TB somehow had a negative impact upon the party in an electoral way is bizarre.
Circulation of 25k? 24,999 going to labour party headquarters, Birmingham city council, George eaton's friends and family and pretty much every quango in the country. No serious person or anyone with half a brain would actually buy this propaganda. You're better off subscribing to the socialist worker.
Why do Blairites continue to haunt the Labour Party when there are two other big parties that reflect their own political views..?The Blairites share with the tory-led coalition a love of big business,dismissal of the virtues of the public sector and it's workers,disregard for policies which aid social mobility within society,promotion of faux green but oh so caring measures,a belief in the right of those working in the financial sector to enrich themselves and impoverish others,low tax economy,genuflecting before anti-democratic press and media oligarchs and of course a love of sound bites,spin and false compassion.
7. The best education results at 14, 16 and 18 ever.
You can't believe that. Some of the others are well dodge. But you don't believe this Jon do you?
swantra nandawar, Brown was massively unpopular within 4 months of being leader, if blair lef tin 2004 and Brown took over ,its possible borwn would have lost the 2005 election
Yet another raise an argument reporter
On Sky Blair stated Mr milliband did not want or need his advice neither has he asked for it maybe you confuse a friendly bit of advice from a consultation . Get off your bandwagon
Jon well done better than the reporter of this article.
Comerons lot comes up with ideas from an age old thatcherism spasms.They do not care whom they hurt when making decisions.We know that there isn't enough to go around but for goodness sake at least protect those that are finding life dificult, its not about long term unemployed, its about getting the jobs first then they can sort out the long term unemployed .This is bourne out on the matter of the coalition looking into ways of helping those to get into work without being worse of than on benefits another statement on there election bullsh'''t. Someone has to point out they are neglecting the poorest due to an idiology they shared with us the last time thatcherism was around and they are in part to blame for this long term unemployed.as they ruined the workplace by throwing the fathers and mothers of this generation onto the scrapheap.The sins of Lady Thatcher returns. Speak up louder anybody. mike maley
Blair/Brown failed to distinguish between two business communities: one produces real wealth the other money. Supporting firms and entrepreneurs in the real economy will be essential to LP recovery and so will be controlling the financial sector. Blair’s advice is half good.
The media keep off the agenda the fact that high street banks create 97% of money in circulation. They do that when they lend to us. That money-as-debt vanishes when we repay it but, meanwhile, we pay interest on it. The 3% of official money (coins and notes) goes into circulation free of interest and 100% could be created that way.
No one creates new money to pay that interest, so it can only be paid by creating more money-as-debt, putting the real economy under continual pressure to grow, when stability and better distribution of wealth would be better.
The banks also choose to whom they lend the money they create. No wonder they lend to their partners to ‘invest’ in the global financial casino where they win until they need the real economy to pick up the tab. A stable money system would not serve the banks as well as property-, dotcom- and etc-bubbles and ever-growing burdens of debt on us all.
It is time to end the privilege of legalised forgery that the banks enjoy (aka ‘fractional reserve banking) and return to the state a fundamental power it should never have given away in exchange for an ever-growing national debt.
We shall not see this issue on the agenda if we rely on media that are beholden to the financial sector. You can find information by searching for various pressure groups and think tanks: Christian Council for Monetary Justice, American Monetary
im afraid Blair undone all his good work by taking this country to an illegal war with iraq.
He has simply sold his soul to the yanks and now no matter how rightoeus he shows himself the legacy of an illegal war will always haunt him.
I'm not gonna defend Irawq, But as you said it got rid of Saddma, it may never be seen a sucsess, but it'll will be seen as justicifed in getting rid of saddam
2.Whn Blair took over even with Black wednesday, John Smith was 1% ahead in the polls he got 13% more than, yes his third victory he got the sa,me percentage of votes as Cameron did this time, But there was very little between the 92 manifesto and teh 97 one, and labour got less than 10million votes in the 87 one same as what blair got in 2005 so yes Blair did lose laobur nearly 4million votes ,but he increased it by 4million in the first place, Labour were ahead in the polls for the first 9 years of Blair's leeadership, (apart form a couple of days during the fuel protest) his last year was marked by Prezza's affair the cash for peerages enquiry and the 900 foreign prsioners not beign deported ,yet he was only a couple of points behind in the polls even then,Blair nenver criticised Browns time in office (something Brown did) whatever yuo think of Blair it wasn't lalobur winning in 97, that would have happened without him it was Blair that won it, and he has ideas that Ed miliband should listen too,unless labour want to buy into the 1983 Tony benn idea that labour lost then and in 2010 as the manifesto's weren't left wing enough.
1. How about the trebling of house prices, pricing millions out of affordable homes. Or is that not important as millions of other fortunates can feel rich?
2. failing to build or even maintain the socisal sector housing stock.
These factors will haunt Britain and Labour for a long time. Housing is one of theree basic necessities of life, and the present and future is uncertain tenancies in a private rented sector dominated by B2Let amateurs, a disincentive to have children, and potentially millions on housing benefit during retirement. Who will pay for that?
3. Allowing a mushrooming of personal debt. It reached the size of the economy for the fisrt time since the Industrial Revolution.
4. The assumption that markets self regulate, leading to the largest recession since the Second World War. Yes, it was international. But it was based on policies (deregulation, and huge rise in debt) that Blai supported and implemented in the UK.
And the denail, oh the denial. That somehow this was all the fault of Brown, and it wasn't me guv.
5. Civil liberties treated as the domain of dreamers.
6. And Iraq. The deceit, the ignoring of the will of the people, the arrogance.
I do not deny that NewLabour had successes. But the price was enormous. Advance in education, sure start etc is cancelled out by the fact people can't afford a home where to bring up children, and that the Tories have an excuse to dismantle the welfare state.
Ultimately, it failed.
And coup de grace, to support the Tories against his own party. Barely better than Ramsay McDonald.
Mehdi Hasan is a contributing writer for the New Statesman and the co-author of Ed: The Milibands and the Making of a Labour Leader. He was the New Statesman's senior editor (politics) from 2009-12.