“Lazy Labour” wasn’t an attack, says source close to Jim Murphy

March 7, 2013 11:07 am

Today there has been coverage  in several newspapers of Jim Murphy’s comments to the New Statesman on “Lazy Labour”. Some, including the Guardian and the Sun, have suggested this was an attack on the Labour Leader from the Shadow Defence Secretary.

Yet LabourList spoke to a source close to Murphy this morning, who denied that his comments were intended in such a way. They told us:

“To suggest this is some sort of attack is to misrepresent and misunderstand what Jim is saying. He’s arguing for year-round campaigning in order to win a national majority which includes taking votes from Tories. That’s how he increased the majority in his own seat and how we have the best chance of getting back in to government.”

Some journalists do seem to have conflated the quote about campaigning, and the quote about electoral strategy. Naughty, naughty…

  • AlanGiles

    Is there anybody in Labour who says something and sticks by it?. They hoist the flag up the flagpole and sees if anybody salutes, then if they don’t their remarks were “taken out of context” or “misunderstood”.

    It’s like Hammond on Welfare versus Defence. Quite a major topic, but it seems the crew of HMS One Nation, from Captain Ed Fearless down , isn’t prepared to either endorse or condone it, until they see which way public opinion is going.
    By trying to be all things to all men (and women) it ends up pleasing nobody, and just makes HM official opposition look indecisive and weak.
    Also, as I pointed out when Murphy’s remarks were printed on LL yesterday, until the Gospel According to St. Crudas is written, there are precious few policies to talk about.

    • John Ruddy

      Suggest you read Amber’s comments to understand it.

  • Amber_Star

    Labour in Scotland knows what Jim meant, even though it is uncomfortable to hear it when it is coming via the mainstream media. Polling for Holyrood 2011 put us on track for a really good showing. We took it for granted & put too little time & money into consolidating Labour’s polling with a strong campaign. The eventual manifesto was a clusterf*ck which gave activists nothing to campaign with & it was too late for a ‘values & loyalty’ appeal to our potential supporters. At the 11th hour, many of ‘our’ voters either switched horses or – more likely, given the low turn out – didn’t vote at all. Suffice to say, we got sorely beaten.

    Jim could quietly keep all of this ‘in house’ & hope that it filtered through to Labour activists outside Scotland by a sort of internal osmosis. Or he could ‘take one for the team’ by going public with it & enduring the brickbats. His efforts will be wasted & the controversy he created will be for nothing, if Labour’s team doesn’t follow up & get Movement for Change actually moving! The activist structure & regular voter contact needs to be in place long before there’s a manifesto or we’ll be unable to spread the word directly. And our policies will be misconstrued or have the wrong emphasis, if we leave it to the mainstream media.

  • Raging Leftie

    He’s is right, leaving it all to the last minute won’t work. Labour need to slowly and steadily gain the support of the defectors and swingers over the next couple of years. Showing that they are able to supply viable alternatives to Government policy over time will do more than empty promises on the election campaign.

  • Daniel Speight

    Yet LabourList spoke to a source close to Murphy this morning…

    An unnamed source is it Mark? Shame.

  • Monkey_Bach

    While my first priority is to oust the extremely poisonous Conservative Party from power it’s dyed-in-the-wool NuLab people, like Jim Murphy and others, who render it only just possible for me to hold my nose and vote Labour. It’s a bit like preferring benign cancer to malignant cancer because the former is often local, less aggressive, and metastasises more slowly and so takes longer to kill you in the long run.

    Devil and the deep blue sea stuff.

    Frying pan and the fire malarkey.

    (Cancer is still cancer though, benign or malignant.)

    Eeek.

  • Brumanuensis

    The reason the Guardian construed it as an attack was because the article in question was written by Nicholas Watt, who appears to bear some sort of deeply-held grudge against Ed Miliband and Ed Balls.

    Nothing novel here, in short.

    • postageincluded

      Him and Wyatt are two cheeks. What blows out from between them comes from their boss. Not that they dislike flapping in his breeze.

Latest

  • Comment Why Britain’s women won’t “calm down”

    Why Britain’s women won’t “calm down”

    From November 4th until the end of 2014, women across the country will effectively be working for free. The gender pay gap means that women are paid on average 15% less than their male counterparts; we have to work an extra 60 days annually to earn the same amount as a man doing the same job. For black and minority ethnic women, the pay gap is 20%. Women in Britain need a pay rise. It was heartening to see so many […]

    Read more →
  • Featured Get used to hearing a lot more of what Cameron’s Tories really think…

    Get used to hearing a lot more of what Cameron’s Tories really think…

    The revelation earlier this week that government welfare minister Lord Freud had referred to disabled people as ‘not worth the full [minimum] wage’ seemed somewhat familiar – and not only because of the Prime Minister’s repeated assertion that, when it comes to disabled people, anything his government does is above criticism. Fans of longstanding rent-a-reactionary-view Philip ‘why it is so offensive to black up your face’ Davies, Conservative MP for Shipley, will remember that he made the same point in […]

    Read more →
  • News “I rule it out”: Burnham says he won’t be making a leadership bid

    “I rule it out”: Burnham says he won’t be making a leadership bid

    Andy Burnham has been named in several newspapers lately as a possible future Labour leadership candidate, but he was keen to scotch such rumours when he appeared on Marr this morning, saying: “I rule it out… No, I am [a] Labour loyalist to my core. I am loyal to the leader, and the leader of our party, Ed Miliband, has said, the NHS will be his big priority going towards this election. I am 100% focused on developing a plan for the […]

    Read more →
  • News Tory minister: “disabled people work harder because they’re grateful to have a job”

    Tory minister: “disabled people work harder because they’re grateful to have a job”

    Tory Minister Lord Freud was put under pressure this week after he suggested that disabled people were “not worth” the minimum wage. Today another Tory Minister appears to have make similarly ill-judged (and revealing) comments about the Tory Party’s approach to disabled workers. The Independent on Sunday reports that Andrew Selous – the former parliamentary aide to Iain Duncan Smith and now a Justice Minister – told a fringe meeting: “disabled people work harder because they’re grateful to have a job”. […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Our party should welcome a debate with Farage – and we can win it

    Our party should welcome a debate with Farage – and we can win it

    By James Dray and Lewis Iwu Should UKIP be part of the televised election debates? Forget for a minute the question of whether or not Farage should be entitled to be there; instead, let’s look at the real question; can we beat him? A man who significant numbers of people see the rather obvious faults of but still really rather like? A man who decimated Nick Clegg in the European debates? We think that we can, and more importantly, we […]

    Read more →
7ads6x98y