Iain Martin: Scottish Labour drops a nuclear bomb on itself
To say that Labour has not had a good six months is something of an understatement.
It seems hard to credit that just six months ago the Labour party thought it was set to lead the government of the UK and they appeared to have a good chance of doing so.
But since losing the election they proceeded to inflict on themselves the most divisive leadership election I can remember, and made probably the most inappropriate choice of party leader that any major British party has made for centuries.
The only thing that stops me saying that Jeremy Corbyn's election was the most ludicrous appointment to a leadership position since Emperor Caligula made his horse Incitatus a senator is that that appointment probably never happened. It is more likely that Caligula merely threatened to appoint Incitatus to the senate or even have him elected Consul, and these threats were intended as an insult to the senators, inferring that an animal could do the job as well as they did. Jeremy Corbyn's election, however, was all too read.
Since then Labour politicians have been fighting like ferrets in the proverbial sack.
The latest self-inflicted folly comes from Labour's Scottish conference, where they took a decision described by Iain Martin as follows:
"Scottish Labour drops a nuclear bomb on itself."
We now have the absurd spectacle that Labour's UK leader is against trident while most of his MPs are for it while Labour's Scottish leader would renew it while most Scots party members would not.
As Iain puts it
"Scottish Labour’s activists and members have responded" (to Labour's problems) "by deciding to nuke what is left of their party’s electoral prospects, aiding the SNP and the Tories in the process. The party’s Scottish conference voted overwhelmingly against the renewal of Trident, the UK’s independent nuclear deterrent, which means that Scottish Labour is now a unilateralist party. Dugdale isn’t against Trident. The Shadow cabinet at the UK level is split. Jeremy Corbyn says he would never pull the nuclear trigger. Would you put this lot in charge of defending Britain?"
It seems hard to credit that just six months ago the Labour party thought it was set to lead the government of the UK and they appeared to have a good chance of doing so.
But since losing the election they proceeded to inflict on themselves the most divisive leadership election I can remember, and made probably the most inappropriate choice of party leader that any major British party has made for centuries.
The only thing that stops me saying that Jeremy Corbyn's election was the most ludicrous appointment to a leadership position since Emperor Caligula made his horse Incitatus a senator is that that appointment probably never happened. It is more likely that Caligula merely threatened to appoint Incitatus to the senate or even have him elected Consul, and these threats were intended as an insult to the senators, inferring that an animal could do the job as well as they did. Jeremy Corbyn's election, however, was all too read.
Since then Labour politicians have been fighting like ferrets in the proverbial sack.
The latest self-inflicted folly comes from Labour's Scottish conference, where they took a decision described by Iain Martin as follows:
"Scottish Labour drops a nuclear bomb on itself."
We now have the absurd spectacle that Labour's UK leader is against trident while most of his MPs are for it while Labour's Scottish leader would renew it while most Scots party members would not.
As Iain puts it
"Scottish Labour’s activists and members have responded" (to Labour's problems) "by deciding to nuke what is left of their party’s electoral prospects, aiding the SNP and the Tories in the process. The party’s Scottish conference voted overwhelmingly against the renewal of Trident, the UK’s independent nuclear deterrent, which means that Scottish Labour is now a unilateralist party. Dugdale isn’t against Trident. The Shadow cabinet at the UK level is split. Jeremy Corbyn says he would never pull the nuclear trigger. Would you put this lot in charge of defending Britain?"
Comments