Peter Kenyon

Setting the agenda for Labour's leadership: accountability

Before the debate about who will be the next elected leader of the Labour Party gets overwhelmed by the X-factor, let's focus on the x-factor - the ones on ballot papers at the next set of elections. There could be  another general election in less than 12 months. In any event, there will be some local elections next May, plus Scottish Parliamentary and locals, and the Welsh Assembly all of which are now four-year fixed term events.

Labour is still carrying baggage from its 13-years in government at Westminster, as well as having an extraordinary list of achievements to its credit. New Labour's critical and ultimately lethal fault (in electoral terms) was abandonment of accountability. It started before the 1997 landslide, with the suspension of shadow cabinet meetings six months earlier, and it was all too evident yesterday at a hastily arranged special National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting to hear plans for further talks with the Liberal-Democrats.

You might be wondering whether I have lost my marbles, but yes, while the media was reporting the Lab-Lib talks were over, finito, some 30 member of Labour's ruling NEC were crowded into the Hamlyn Room in 39 Victoria Street with party staff hanging onto a conference call with outgoing Prime Minister Gordon Brown. He set out the mechanisms for deciding the terms of a Lab-Lib pact. Surreal, to the point of farce. Any deal would have depended critically on the 258 women and men freshly elected Labour MPs. Had anyone in the Labour leadership bother to consult even the current chair of the Parliamentary Labour Party? We all know the answer. No. As for the NEC chair, forget it. Events have brought that nonsense to an abrupt and tragic end. The lessons have to be learned if Labour wants more x-factor at the polls.

The Prime Minister and his government did have to go through the constitutional necessity of ensuring continuing, before bowing to the inevitability of electoral arithmetic. But that did not give any of the Cabinet authority to unilaterally decide a negotiating brief or the emissaries that might have taken Labour into coalition. In the well established practices of New Labour a shameless papering over the cracks was proposed at the NEC. (I won't bore you with the detail, but am happy to respond to comments.) I supported the talks about a rainbow coalition as a political necessity, knowing the arithmetic was tight. But I oppose abuse of power and lack of accountability. So a set of tests is needed to judge the credentials of those leadership wannabees that goes beyond what triumphs down a TV lens, especially those who were Cabinet members only 24 hours ago.

Labour headed for opposition today?

'Vote Clegg, get Cameron' was the warning to voters ahead of last week's election. Latest developments with the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats back in talks point to a Con/Lib-Dem coalition, possibly being announced before the end of the day. Talking to trade union contacts over the past few days, I have sensed a real desire to keep the Conservatives out of government. When the Labour National executive Committee (NEC) meets later today, I will listen keenly to accounts of talks between the Prime Minister's emissaries and the Liberal-Democrats. The BBC's Chief Political Correspondent Laura Kuenssberg has just reported that Schools Secretary, Ed Balls, may have pushed the Lib-Dems too hard and into the Tories hands. Whatever, the truth of that it would be tragic if the possibility of protecting the country from conservativism were lost. The parliamentary arithmetic could have delivered a traffic light coalition, just. If there is still scope for considered negotiation, my inclination will be to give Lab-Lib talks another chance, with a negotiating team committed to success.

UK political stability requires cross-party budgetary agreement asap

Some form of cross party collaboration is essential if market confidence in sterling and the UK government's triple A credit rating is to be retained, now that we know that no political party in the new UK Parliament has a majority of seats.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown remains in office until he resigns (as Prime Minister). The leadership of the Labour Party is a separate issue. Conservative commentators continue to insist that their electoral result gives them the right to govern. This is despite their own failure to secure a majority of seats in the new House of Commons. Their spin continues to emphasise their view that Brown has lost a mandate to govern. "Been rejected by the electorate" are the words used by the BBC's political editor, Nick Robinson. That is true on his own, as Leader of the Labour Party. But it doesn't mean that he doesn't have a mandate to take a leading role in a coalition, and in person.

The most critical issue facing the country is the state of the economy. We have heard from the leaders of the nationalist parties about their concerns concerning funding from the UK Exchequer. Part of the price of any political understandings will be how their interests are going to be addressed in public spending plans for the future are a consideration. What we know is that Tories plan cuts this year, and Labour and the Lib-Dems do not.

Looking a little further out into the future, there is the Greek lesson. The election campaign was littered with uncertainty about the detail of necessary public expenditure cuts. Public unrest in Greece has been a salutory and tragically lethal reminder of the consequences of imposed austerity. Having taken the UK economy through the worst recession in 80 years, Brown to my mind has won the right to see that work through. Evidence that a double-dip recession has been managed away will come in the next twelve months. The other part of a government programme that addresses widespread public concerns is political reform, of which a referendum on electoral reform is Labour Party policy.

So as we await the latest dispositions from Tory leader David Cameron and Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg, the question arises are we going to have more assertions that Brown has lost any right to govern, or a more considered reflection of the constitutional realities, and economic and social necessities to give the UK a new government by early next week.

No winners except activists and voters in British 2010 General Election

Winding down after a six-hour shift on the blogger team at LBC Election special I am still looking for an official winner of the 2010 General Election. I find myself in agreement with Prime Minister Gordon Brown who seems determined to test the scope for coalition given the electoral interest in securing economic recovery and political reform. On the basis of results to date, this is the time to test whether the voice of the people can secure a majoirty of seats in the House of Commons.

Fellow Labour blogger here in the studio, Anthony Painter summed up the situation as he sees it here.

The way in which Labour's vote has held up in many parts of the country looks like a tremendous victory for Labour Party activism. Need much more detail to help form a considered view for the future of Labour Party democracy.