Will a left-wing challenge to Brown be good for Cameron?

The hard left Labour MP John McDonnell has confirmed that he wants to challenge Gordon Brown for the Labour leadership.  Mr McDonnell accused Tony Blair and Gordon Brown of systematically alienating various strands of Labour's rainbow coalition - "students, pensioners, public service workers, trade unionists, green activists and civil liberties and peace campaigners".  He'll need more than forty Labour MPs to sign his leadership bid in order for it to become valid.  This might become complicated if other left-wingers want to stand.  Lynne Jones and Michael Meacher have also been mentioned as possible challengers to the man who has recently upset the left with his support for nuclear power stations and a replacement for Trident.  There may need to be some sort of primary on to agree on an anti-Brown candidate but the left's tendency to squabble about almost everything may make this tricky.

Will a left-wing challenge be good for the Tories?

NO: Labour will get lots of publicity during its months-long leadership election and it will be a perfect way for Gordon Brown to relaunch himself.  He will show that - in comparison with the Labour left - he is moderate.  He will show - in comparison with David Cameron - he has the experience to be a strong leader for Britain.

YES: A Labour leadership election will expose Labour divisions.  The Conservative Party - already seen by voters as more united than Labour - will be able to exploit these divisions and show that Gordon Brown will be a prisoner of these left-wingers.  Tony Blair could attack the left with impunity when he had majorities of 170 but thirty or forty left-wing MPs - energised by a leadership election - will be able to hold Gordon Brown to ransom in parliamentary votes.

What do you think?

Comments

[Martin Curtis]

The announcement is bad news for those, like me, who want Blair out asap for the sake of the Country. He could use this as an excuse to hang on to power, on the basis that a hard-fought left v right leadership election would harm Labour.

[Richard]

When will these hard leftists realise that you can't win an election without the support of Middle Britain? To quote Hartley Shawcross, "We are the masters now". (OK so that wasn't his exact quote but it's how everyone remembers it.)

[William Norton]

Talking in terms of whether Labour doing X or Y is good or bad for the Conservatives implicitly concedes that the initiative remains with Labour. That's the wrong mindset. The strategy (whatever it is) should aim to make the choice and method of arriving at the next Labour leader an irrelevant interlude.

So I wouldn't waste time and effort considering the pros and cons of the replacement of Blair (it's not as if Tories have got a vote in a matter). Much better to concentrate on framing the debate and cementing public support (which is something Con Home could discuss usefully) and let Labour have the headache of which course of action enables them to react/recover best.

[MH]

William, well said. I think that the key question is whether Blair's departure acts as a leeching exercise and draws all of the public's hatred and disillusionment with the present Government and leaves Brown as a new, unsullied proposition. I am genuinely in two minds on this one.

[Sally Roberts]

Will it be good for Cameron? In a word - NO. Any hope of McDonnell winning (which WOULD help the Conservatives)? - yes two - Bob Hope and No Hope!
It could be thought that this move has been made to help Labour.... The reason being that
(a) McDonnell will not win (see above); and
(b) Gordon will be presented as a RIGHT winger when we all know that he is not.

Result - our fox is well and truly shot and Gordon is elected with a large majority.

[Yet Another Anon]

A challenge from Old Labour to Gordon Brown will flounder quickly and actually will strengthen Gordon Brown's position just as when Neil Kinnock was ranged against fringe elements of the party it made him look more appealing to people who otherwise were more attracted to the Alliance or the Conservative Party.

A combination of a feeling among many Labour members that he should have succeeded John Smith and that it was what John Smith would have wanted and that he is also now seen by many inside the party as being New Labour's continuity candidate and that Claire Short, Michael Meacher or John McDonnell all want to return to policies that have been comprehensively rejected in the past. Then there is the matter of experience - other than Tony Blair really Gordon Brown is the most experienced candidate that Labour has and one major thing they have to use against David Cameron in much the same way that Neil Kinnock suffered compared especially to Margaret Thatcher in the sense of perceived inexperience because he had never been a Government Minister whereas she had been a minister in the Macmillan government and a Cabinet minister in the Heath government and by the time Neil Kinnock came to the leadership had already been Prime Minister for 4 years and Leader of the Opposition for 4 years before that.

[Yet Another Anon]

John McDonnell probably won't manage to achieve the neccessary 44 signatures from MP's and if anything might end up doing a deal with someone who can such as Claire Short, the risk for opponents of Gordon Brown inside Labour is that when it comes to the election nobody except Gordon Brown gets enough signatures to be nominated and he wins outright which in a sense would mean that there had been a semi contest in that candidates would have been put up and failed to reach the minimum criteria.

Michael Meacher really is getting rather old now to be becoming party leader for the first time, he will be 70 in 2 years time and although he was about the Highest Ranking Minister of State he doesn't have the Kudos of having been a Cabinet Minister, Frank Field has similar problems - it's going to be Old Labour (Claire Short) vs New Labour (Gordon Brown) vs Old Social Democratic Labour (Frank Field probably) and so far as the leadership goes Gordon Brown virtually has it in the bag.

[sjm]

If Gordon Brown gets it, he'll have to spend his whole premiership defending the Labour Govt's record of sleaze and incompetence.

If anyone else gets it, they'll have to spend their whole premiership defending the Labour Govt's record of sleaze and incompetence.

So let's concentrate on our Party, not Labour.

[Yet Another Anon]

If anyone else gets it, they'll have to spend their whole premiership defending the Labour Govt's record of sleaze and incompetence.
The division if anything comes down to Gordon Brown who absolutely is the candidate of continuty and is quite open that most of the policies of this government are actually initiated by him or initiated with his tacit approval, and a candidate that either says that New Labour's purpose was just to end 18 years of Conservative Government and that it is time for a more radical approach, or someone who praises many of the things this government has been doing with some caveats - in the case of someone seeking a radical Socialist mandate they will seek to present themselves as standing for something that has not been implimented in government for 30 years and by some definitions even longer and just as Margaret Thatcher did they may well campaign by attacking former Prime Ministers from their own party as much as they criticise the previous Conservative Government and past Conservative Governments and the opposition.

[Yet Another Anon]

But barring Illness, Death or Scandal it will be Gordon Brown who is the next Prime Minister and Labour leader.

[John]

Re Mrs T don't think she was actually a minister in the Macmillan government, A PS at pensions? so she did have some experience, but not ministerial as such: could be wrong scratching in memory.

When the voters really want change, not to sure they'll look to closely at the opposition, 'It'll be lets throw the b*****s out' and that will be it.

The problem for the Tories will be when GB takes over (It'll be him) there will be a renewal feel, and 'Oh well lets give him a chance,' Thats what happened with Major. Though the gilt soon came of Major within months of the election, the ERM disaster did for him, and he never recovered.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Nick Assinder thinks this move may flush out some of the potential 'moderate' challengers to Gordon Brown.

That would be far more interesting, as it would leave His Gordship exposed to being squeezed from the left by the Abbott/Jones/McDonnell/Meacher/Short (Dobson will sell-out to the Brown campaign at the earliest opportunity) lot and from the right by the Blears/Byers/Johnson/Milburn/Miliband/Reid lot.

After hearing people banging on about how the public hate disunity, it would be nice to see how they react to the upper echelons of the Labour Party scrapping like ferrets in a sack.

[Yet Another Anon]

Re Mrs T don't think she was actually a minister in the Macmillan government, A PS at pensions? so she did have some experience, but not ministerial as such
When she tookover as Conservative leader in 1975 she had already been Secretary of State for Education for nearly 4 years and in the early 1960's Under Secretary of State for Pensions and by the time Neil Kinnock became Labour leader she had been Prime Minister for 4 years as well; Neil Kinnock on the other hand had no experience in government and was only experienced in any way in the sense that he had been in parliament a number of years and a prominent figure in the NEC, in fact as with David Cameron he had only been in the Shadow Cabinet a short time before he became Labour leader - John Smith on the other hand had been a former Minister of State, it had always been a problem that the Liberals had for decades that they were accused of inexperience although of course from 1981 to 1992 or so the Alliance frontbench was as dominated by former cabinet ministers as Labour's was and until 1997 in fact Labour was at least no more experienced in the art of government than the Liberal Democrats were. There is no doubt that it added an edge to Margaret Thatcher in 1987 and even to a lesser extent to John Major in 1992 and helped limit the collapse of the Conservative vote in 1997.

[John]

Sorry Yet another anon, didn't phrase that well. Agreed with the rest but not the Macmillan Government part, didn't think she was actually a minister in that government.

[Yet Another Anon]

That would be far more interesting, as it would leave His Gordship exposed to being squeezed from the left by the Abbott/Jones/McDonnell/Meacher/Short (Dobson will sell-out to the Brown campaign at the earliest opportunity) lot and from the right by the Blears/Byers/Johnson/Milburn/Miliband/Reid lot.
Diane Abbott has always been a great Gordon Brown fan, Lynne Jones really is a nobody, Michael Meacher maybe would have been a contender the last time around if he had stood but it's too late now, Claire Short has 6 years Cabinet Experience - but then again she has all the tact of a bulldozer, if Hilary Benn stood he might pickup the Old Labour vote although I rather suspect that he will back Gordon Brown and that he actually has very similar views to Gordon Brown - his father acknowledges that he and his son have very different views on political matters.

Hazel Blears really is a party person, I don't know she is particularily New Labour but she is someone who will stand up for what the party line is - I can imagine her becoming Deputy Leader but improbable as leader, Stephen Byers if anything has some reservations about some New Labour policies notably the Tax Credits schemes and favours more redistribution - if anything he would be a possible alternative to Frank Field as a more sort of Old Social Democrat, Alan Johnson appears to want to be Deputy Leader not leader and probably will back Gordon Brown although if anything his views are probably fairly mainstream Labour if anything, Alan Milburn just doesn't have the commitment - he keeps going into government briefly and then leaving again to be with his family and I doubt he would stand for leader even if most of the party begged him to, David Miliband is an intellectual lightweight and John Reid is about as appealing to the electorate as the average slug.

[Yet Another Anon]

the bit from That... to lot. in the first paragraph in the last message should have been in italics as I was quoting that.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Both Johnson and Milibland have been steadily building their profiles and have the potential to secure support from a lot of the big names in the Labour Party.

If His Gordship thinks he will beat either of those two with his namesake Nick, Harriet Harmless, the discredited Charles Clarke and London's third-choice Frank Dobson as his main cheerleaders, then he may be in for a bit of an unpleasant shock unless he can start buttering up more of the influential moderates.

[John Slug]

John Reid is about as appealing to the electorate as the average slug.

On behalf of the slug community, I would like to object to that remark. From now on we will take all of Yet Another Anon's remarks with a pinch of salt. Or rather, not with a pinch of salt, if you follow.

[Yet Another Anon]

Both Johnson and Milibland have been steadily building their profiles and have the potential to secure support from a lot of the big names in the Labour Party.
Tony Blair likes David Miliband because he's a Blair Lite version, but outside of the Metrosexuals hardly anyone knows who he is and he really has no more leadership credentials that the average leader of a Labour Council group up and down the country, if he was to become Prime Minister him and David Cameron would be like Tweedledum and Tweedledee and most of the population wouldn't be able to tell which was which - probably be the lowest turnout in any British General Election in history and Meinzes Campbell would be able to stand out and might end up coming out of it rather well.

Alan Johnson just doesn't seem interested at the moment in the Leadership position, he certainly has made it clear that he is aiming at the Deputy Leadership and if anything is looking to be part of a ticket with Gordon Brown, a lot of people aiming for the Deputy Leadership are working on the assumption that Gordon Brown will be leader and the people who so far have come out and said that they would stand for the Leadership if no one else would are not credible as leader, Tony Blair after all is going as leader and so is John Prescott so it is quite open for even cabinet ministers to say that when the time comes they intend to stand for either position and yet Gordon Brown so far is the only current Cabinet Minister who is actually open about standing for the leadership.

[Yet Another Anon]

Certainly if John McDonnell were to become leader, the Labour government would collapse within a few weeks - there would be massive defections of New Labour elements to especially the Liberal Democrats but also to the Conservative Party and at best he would be left a lame duck Prime Minister of a minority government and a party that was heading for the same oblivion that the Liberals faced in the 20th century.

[Primrose League Player]

"The Conservative Party - already seen by voters as more united than Labour."

Anyone for Europe?

[Morten Fjeldberg]

As someone who follows British politics (Norwegian politics is so booooring), I must say that there are exciting times.

David Cameron seem more likeable, articulate and charming than Hague, Duncan Smith and Howard.

Gordon Brown can not be compared to Tony Blair, though he may be a liar, is very carismatic and the man behind the whole New Labour idea. Brown is more of the old socialist school.

Of course, a party will struggle after so many years in Government (Tories 18 years and CDU/CSU Germanys 16 years). Now you have the upper-hand, where you can point out that Gordon Brown is no new man, but a continuing of the old sleaze.

Just hope you can get back The Sun, lean back and enjoy another long period in Government.

[Ted]

Brown will win because if he doesn't he'd be a Ted Heath squared as far as great sulks go. Great for us as the ructions would destroy Labour but Labour know that so they will vote for Brown.

[Yet Another Anon]

If anything Labour's divisions over Europe are far more clear cut, there are far more Euro-Realists and they have always cut more broadly across the party; Tony Blair and John Smith certainly were both committed Europhiles whereas Jim Callaghan was rather suspicous of the EU and so is Gordon Brown and Neil Kinnock having started off as opposed to the EEC as with Harold Wilson ended up being strongly in favour of it.

Many of Labour's backbenchers are effectively Communist and that the party leadership has not attempted to purge them is amazing really.

[David Belchamber]

As William Norton says at 12.18: "Much better to concentrate on framing the debate and cementing public support (which is something Con Home could discuss usefully)".
I am sure that the policy groups will come up with more attractive policies than Nulab's regular soundbites but cementing public support is something DC should not neglect in the meanwhile.
Thinking things through more thoroughly before announcing a policy is vital, occasionally mentioning the core policies and perhaps promising that all the policy groups will give interim reports at the Autumn conference might also allay the sort of fears we hear too frequently these days.
I wouldn't worry too much about Labour's leadership contest, although it would get interesting is someone like Alun Johnson stood against Brown. Brown is "analogue", "a roadblock to progress" and cannot possibly succeed in distancing himself from this shoddy government.

[benc]

So I wouldn't waste time and effort considering the pros and cons of the replacement of Blair (it's not as if Tories have got a vote in a matter). Much better to concentrate on framing the debate and cementing public support (which is something Con Home could discuss usefully)...Willliam Norton 12.18.

I agree.

Meanwhile, the LibDems focus on real priorities - eg attacking in Conservative held seats.

http://folkestone-hythelibdems.org.uk/news/422.html?PHPSESSID=81d5b265b4ce463a2480d10b8b0e6422

[Yet Another Anon]

Of course, a party will struggle after so many years in Government
I'm not sure that things around the world bare this out really, I rather think that the Conservatives lost in 1997 because they knifed their former leader in the back, they pursued absurdly extravagant fiscal policies in the run up to the 1992 General Election and failed to recognise that the ERM which Major, Hestletine, Clarke, Lawson and Hurd had all though was the best thing since sliced bread and the joining of which had been a matter of faith for them and pressure had been brought on Mrs Thatcher who in an extroidinary lapse of judgement against her own beliefs agreed, then suddenly John Major and Norman Lamont faced a huge deficit largely of their own making having failed to prop the pound up inside the ERM and also for some strange reason rather than pushing the Maastricht Treaty through at a time when the Conservatives had a majority of around 86 still and so rebellions would have been largely unreported by the press (of course it would have been better to have withdrawn from Europe but John Major having agreed to it it wasn't then handled very well politically) and that would have removed a major item of contention that in a parliament with a majority of 21 and falling dogged the government's every step - it would have been quite possible for the Conservatives to have won the 1997 General Election otherwise.

What usually happens is that initially the government can escape blame, especially if it represents something not tried before or where it has been out of government for a very long time previously, then gradually the electorate start blaming it for things that go wrong but changes that the government are implimenting also increasingly feed through into the general culture and so there comes a point where this starts to work in their favour especially if they have been going against the grain - the culture starts going their way and the opposition parties are liable to find that they have the option of changing towards the new culture or of being in perpetual opposition, so long as the trend is for economic growth and stability there is no reason why they should lose and so long as they don't adversely affect the majority of the population there is no reason why they should lose, fiscal and monetary policies brought down the Major administration.

[Yet Another Anon]

I wouldn't worry too much about Labour's leadership contest, although it would get interesting is someone like Alun Johnson stood against Brown. Brown is "analogue", "a roadblock to progress" and cannot possibly succeed in distancing himself from this shoddy government.
Not sure there is really that much difference between the 2 of them policywise, Gordon Brown is better known among the General Public and really has been behind a lot of the ideas of New Labour right from the time that John Smith became Labour leader, no doubt there will be some miniscule shifts in emphasis in new policy initiatives in fact I rather suspect rather more radically New Labour than ideas have been under Tony Blair, Gordon Brown is more ideas focused than Tony Blair is and more likely to take a particular line and stick to it unwaveringly, I rather expect a somewhat laconic premiership.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"Alan Johnson just doesn't seem interested at the moment in the Leadership position"

I disagree - he played a very canny game in a series of high-profile appearances recently and carefully avoided being drawn on the subject.

"if anything is looking to be part of a ticket with Gordon Brown"

I'd heard that it was a two-way fight between Harriet Harmless and Jack Straw to be His Gordship's running mate. The Brown-Johnson partnership seems unlikely to me.

If John McDonnell is serious about challenging His Gordship, the door is well and truly open for one of the big hitters (no, not John 'Jabba' Prescott) from the mainstream to enter the race too.

The key to David Miliband entering the race would be a declaration of support from fellow Primrose Hillbilly Douglas Alexander - up to now a Brownie. Stephen Byers and Alan Milburn would also be likely supporters, and Miliband could count on the unofficial patronage of Tony Blair.

Alan Johnson would probably attract support from the numerous Brownsceptics - David Blunkett, John Reid and Hazel Blears would be the leading names here.

His Gordship himself will of course have the support of fellow Scot Alistair Dalek sewn up, to sit alongside endorsements from Jack Last-Straw, Des Browne, Harriet Harmless, Nick Brown, Charles Clarke, Margaret Beckett, Frank Dobson and that ever-opportunistic sly devil Peter Hain (who thinks principles run US schools).

[Morten Fjeldberg]

Of course I can agree. shame that some stabed the greatest PM in the back in 1990.

But which people will Gordon Brown surround himself with in his very short time as PM? (I presume he will call a rather snap GE and lose)? Who is the safest bet to take over as Chancellor of the Exchequer?

At least, you have many sound people in your Shadow Cabinet and Front Bench Team, just make sure that Boris Johnson is promoted.

[Yet Another Anon]

If John McDonnell is serious about challenging His Gordship
I'm sure that there will be a contest but that with regard to the leadership it will be largely based on dissent within Labour to New Labour not within New Labour itself, David Miliband is just being highlighted because he is popular in the Media and he is of a vaguely similar age to David Cameron - I don't think that there is anything actually substantive to suggest that he is even considering running and Tony Blair's approval or disapproval now regarding who is to be Leader or Deputy Leader probably makes little difference - the only thing the Prime Minister can do is to promote people he favours and block people he opposes for the leadership from getting the Kudos of having been in high office, if anything I think that Tony Blair favours Gordon Brown taking over and is trying to encourage through low level hints by some of his courtiers (as I suppose you might refer to them as) that there are tensions so as to encourage talk that Gordon Brown taking over is a fresh start because outright approval by Tony Blair may well be the kiss of death.

I rather suspect that John McDonnell is hoping to raise his profile more than anything else and hoping to get a cabinet position with someone else becoming leader, as a 55 year old with no ministerial experience in a situation in which there are others far better placed to win, if he seriously thinks he can win then he is naive in the extreme.

Jack Straw and Harriet Harman used to be party favourites but I think their time has passed and while doing a lot for Tony Blair they have also burned their bridges with old supporters. Harriet Harman has hardly been very impressive as a minister.

I rather think Alan Johnson see's an opportunity to present himself as a Unity candidate, as with John Prescott he is someone who has strong Trade Union links and rose to prominence through the Unions - he no doubt sees this as a being an opportunity to forge an Alliance with Gordon Brown while presenting himself as someone there to keep an eye on him and give the unions a voice - I'm sure there is going to be an element of that about the Deputy Leadership race, Harriet Harman might hope to be the candidate of New Labour but she has been somewhat eclipsed by Patricia Hewitt I rather think.

[Yet Another Anon]

But which people will Gordon Brown surround himself with in his very short time as PM? (I presume he will call a rather snap GE and lose)? Who is the safest bet to take over as Chancellor of the Exchequer?
2009 Euro Elections Day is the most likely date with the Local Elections moved to that day, I doubt he'll see any need to call a snap election because his becoming leader would really be a continuity anyway.

I suppose by June 2009 Alastair Darling is the most likely to succeed Gordon Brown as Chancellor of the Exhequer, other possibilities by then would be Ed Balls or Dawn Primarolo.

[Yet Another Anon]

At least, you have many sound people in your Shadow Cabinet and Front Bench Team, just make sure that Boris Johnson is promoted.
But what has Boris Johnson actually done? I rather think that he was better as a backbencher and Editor of the Spectator, I think he is rather too disorganised to be really a credible minister.

[Matt Davis]

Ahh now I understand what DC is up to. He's betting that Labour will move dramatically to the left, either as a result of a leadership win for the likes of John McDonnell or, more likely, because Gordon Brown will have to move to the left in order to win a Labour leadership contest. That will leave the NuLab area of the market, err I mean electorate, up for grabs and in DC will merrily sail on the good ship NuLabLite. So that's all right then.

[Paul Kennedy]

" rather suspect that John McDonnell is hoping to raise his profile more than anything else and hoping to get a cabinet position with someone else becoming leader, as a 55 year old with no ministerial experience in a situation in which there are others far better placed to win, if he seriously thinks he can win then he is naive in the extreme." 17:36

His promotion might come sooner than he thinks.......or wants, Foreign & Commonwealth Minister with special responsibility for Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon & Somalia. The position would require very regular and widely publicised visits to the countries in question. ;)

[Paul Kennedy]

Thanks for the link Benc 16:08. It was worth the read. I understand the latest edition of Focus in my area ( 220 odd miles from Bromley & Chislehurst) has gone very political, discussing the Lib Dem "outstanding performance" in that constituency.

Should be a "right rivetting read" and can't wait for it to drop through my letterbox! ;)

[nick]

Sir Stelios Knighthood Cover Up
Stelios was granted a knighthood but no journalist has stepped up to the plate to investigate whether it was appropriate to grant a knighthood to a Monaco resident tax exile who is extremely controversial.
In April 1991 when Stelios Haji-Ioannou, was chief executive of his father's business Troodos Shipping, their tanker Haven blew up off Genoa, killing five crew and disgorging up to 50,000 tonnes of crude oil into the sea - arguably the Mediterranean's worst-ever ecological disaster.
The Haven was an elderly tanker, formerly the Amoco Haven, sister ship of the ill-starred Amoco Cadiz that foundered in 1978. Stelios was accused of poor maintenance and charged in Italy with manslaughter and intimidating and attempting to bribe witnesses. He faced a lengthy jail sentence and liability for hundreds of millions of pounds compensation. Stelios blamed an error by one of the surviving crew. He was acquitted but the case has dragged on ever since with subsequent appeals and demands for compensation thrown out. Environmentalists also must be appalled that a person who was personally responsible for an increase in pollution due to his extensive use of elderly ineffiecient aircraft in the early days of easyJet prior to its merger with GO. Is rewarded with a knighthood.
Tax treatment of aviation fuel as opposed to heating oil and petrol.
Inland Revenue investigators must also see the reward as a slap in the face for hard working UK tax payers. During the last 25 years Stelios has polluted the world including Cypriot beeches. He has been accused of bribery and intimidation. He has avoided tax. He has been taken to court hundreds of times. And yet he is knighted.

When is a journalist going to make a name for themselves by investigating Stelios thoroughly and expose him? Stelios Haji-Ioannou's success? what success is that? every single business he has started has failed with huge losses of ?100s of millions. The only reason easyJet went ok was firstly because his shipping tycoon dad financed the operation and his brother and sister were co-owners. Please tell the world how successful easyInternet, easyCinema, easyCarRentals, easyWatches, easyMobile, easyMusic, easyBus, easyHotel, have been. I can inform you that they have lost a cummulative £300,000,000.00 since inception. The only reason he got his knighthood because of his donation to the Labour Party it had nothing to do with the queen. As Stelios is a Monaco resident and a tax exile he is only entitled to an honarary knighthood anyway and as soon as the newspapers catch on it will be downgraded. Or if he wants to keep it he can register for UK tax and pay millions to the Inland Revenue!
I am a Greek Cypriot and do not consider Stelios one of us. He does not send one penny of his money to Cyprus and left Cyprus when his family was involved in scandal. He lives in Monaco where he gambles in the casino and sleeps with rent boys.
Hella pushti malaga.

[rallie]

But what if John McDonnell is not the only MP to challenge Brown, suppose there was a Blair loyalist, or someone who has no future with brown, say Reid? Now if he was to stand im guessing alot of tony supporters would go for him, Brown is now in no mans land, in order to dissuade them from supporting Reid he will have to offend his own supporters who may support McDonnell (after his trident coments there are already rumblings) You never know he may come third.