We are in effect approaching the very purpose that this site was set up, during the campaign it is envisaged that LabourLost will include comment and news covering #GE10 and to that ends over the next 24 hours we hope to have all major speeches from the Conservative Spring Forum for your delectation.

We wish to thank you wholeheartedly thus far for your continued support of the #labourlost hashtag on Twitter, look after us and we promise to look after you. If you wish to have an article hosted on LabourLost simply get in touch either via this site or via @Labourlost on Twitter.

Let’s win it for Britain.

Where were you on March 17, 1998? It was St Patrick’s Day, of course, but something far more significant than the annual Guinness-fest occurred on that Tuesday.

I remember it well: I should have been at Cheltenham’s National Hunt festival to watch JP McManus’s Istabraq win the first of his three Champion Hurdles. Instead, I was in the office, watching Labour’s Gordon Brown deliver the first of his 10 full Budgets. Istabraq was electrifying; Mr Brown merely intriguing.

The full article and damning evidence can be found here

FROM: THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY CENTRAL OFFICE

The Prime Minister
10, Downing Street
London, SW1A 2AA

3 February 2010

Dear Mr Brown

At Prime Minister’s Questions today, you told the House of Commons that you knew nothing
about the secret fund, worth a reported £50,000, which was held by the Labour Party for your benefit. When asked why you did not declare this on the Register of Members’ Financial Interests (RMFI), you said specifically: ‘I know nothing about what he [the questioner] is talking about.’

This simply cannot be true.

It is clear from Peter Watt, the Labour Party’s former General Secretary, that you were the beneficiary of a secret fund held by the Labour Party. He has said explicitly:

‘Before becoming Prime Minister, Gordon went to some lengths to insulate himself and the Treasury from our financial troubles, setting up his own personal pot of cash at party HQ. This was money we could not dip into, since it was set aside for the Chancellor’s own pet projects. Murray Elder helped secure donations from the Chancellor’s supporters’ (Inside Out, January 2010, page 105).

He went on to claim that it may have been used to finance your ‘long-term campaign to become party leader’ (Inside Out, Peter Watt, 2010, page 105).

Mr Watt’s assertions were widely reported. Indeed, across several pages in the Mail on Sunday, Mr Watt claimed that you used ‘up to £50,000-a-year of Labour money to pay for private polling’ (Mail on Sunday, 17 January 2010).

The allegations were explicitly confirmed as truthful by a Labour official who said in the same article: ‘It [the fund] was funded through donations to the Party.’

In the light of these allegations, my colleague, Greg Hands MP, wrote to you more than two weeks ago, on 17 January, to query why you had failed to declare the fund properly the

Register of Members’ Financial Interests. This letter was publicised in several newspapers on 18 January.

As you did not respond, Greg Hands submitted a complaint to John Lyon, the Parliamentary Commissioner this week. I attach a copy of this complaint for your reference. Again, this complaint was reported.

Yesterday in a speech titled ‘Transforming Politics’, you said that you would ‘do all that is necessary to restore trust’ in politics and the conduct of MPs. If you wish to restore trust in politics, you should stop treating people like fools by claiming that you were unaware of this fund when all the evidence points to the contrary..

I therefore urge you to admit to this fund’s existence, apologise for misleading the House and co-operate with any inquiries that John Lyon may wish to make.

Yours sincerely,

Eric Pickles
Chairman, The Conservative Party
Member of Parliament for Brentwood and Ongar

About Julian:  Julian Bray is a broadcaster, moderator, speaker, journalist and lectures on leadership, company turnarounds, corporate and recession busting strategies, politics, aviation, travel and The City.

In true panto spirit Alistair Darling today announced something more akin to the truth that faces this country.

Ministry Of Misinformation representative pictured adjacent to Comical Ali(stair)

Seems that even today Gordon Brown has a problem with the ‘C’ word. Call that election Gordon and you’ll know what a job cut really is.

With deepest thanks to AngryOfCroydon for this contribution.

LabourLost can only agree with every word of the above.

During the run up to the GE we shall continue to use the #labourlost hashtag on Twitter and we shall also be using the #GE10 hashtag; there are several other suggestions doing the rounds but we believe #GE10 to be fully representative and utilising only 5 characters we believe it is also the best possible use of space for the purpose of Twitter.

So, come the election how will you vote?

Are you a core supporter of a particular Party? Have you always voted the same way?

What forged your opinions and political ethos?

Will you vote on the day with local requirements in mind, for instance against your normal beliefs because you like what a candidate has promised for your constituency?

Will you decide on the day or have you already made your mind up and nothing on this earth however said or done can change that?

Are you doing anything special to help your local candidate? Do you want to get involved but don’t know how to assist? (Whichever Party: use the comment form and we can try to let you know).

It is very clear at the moment that even the Pollsters don’t know what is happening or what is going to happen on the day and we can see this clearly almost on a daily basis with the Conservatives reported to be 17% clear whilst another poll claims Labour have cut the lead to just 9%.

Slowly we have threads of the new shaping of things to come with claim and counter from all sides, the slow unraveling of the pre-budget report and now the potential of a March election which would let Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown off the hook with regards to announcing the real budget and real state of the nation’s finances.

If we do have a March election it would be nigh on impossible to stage a TV Debate although it was blogged to this effect back in October by Parlez_me_nTory.

Just a few things to set the mind working in the run up to Christmas and that long period of plotting, electioneering and gathering of strategy. I love this period as the nation steadies its troops and all parties are placed on a war footing.

Rest assured this site and others are but strings to our bow come the run-up to the General Election and they will be heavily utilised and will also require your continued support.

Normal service will resume as soon as possible.

Thank you.

This video is worthy of your attention.

We’re not talking about being unable to remember a date for a course undertaken or slightly changing the result of a task you actually undertook in a previous role to highlight the positive outcome more favourably, no, this was not just any lie.

This was your diamond studded, gold encrusted M&S kind of lie.

Back in 1994 Sally [Illman] applied for a role with City PR firm Consolidated Communications with a supporting CV claiming she had attained a degree from Oxford; the boss of the firm Alastair Gornall claims that was the deciding factor in her recruitment.

After Consolidated Communications did some checking to confirm Ms Illman’s status the firm were told by Oxford University that no such degree had been issued as the student had dropped out after 2 years. Former students recall how she neglected her studies in favour of socialising.

Mr Gornall challenged his new recruit and following an angry exchange in which he accused her of lying, he subsequently fired her.

Yesterday a spokesman for Mrs Bercow insisted she had never knowingly lied about her academic achievements. He blamed ‘confusion’ that may have arisen when her academic details were passed to Consolidated by a head-hunting firm.

Confusion? In this instance what does that mean? The CV has to be clear it either says the candidate has a degree or it doesn’t, there is no half-way house. That is, unless you are deliberately trying to deceive as it would seem Ms Illman was.

The spokesman continued: ‘In the CV she said she was at Oxford from 1988 to 1990. Anyone could work out that is two years and not three. Nor did the CV say she had completed her degree. She never gave the impression, either verbally or in written form, that she had completed her degree at Oxford.’

Mrs Bercow studied theology in her first year, then switched to history. However, towards the end of her second year, university authorities became concerned that she was neglecting her studies.

They told her to take a year out to ‘get her head together’. She left – but never returned.

In addition to changing her mind on her studies from theology to history to drop-out she also switched her political allegiance in an attempt to find her true mind. Shortly before leaving Oxford, Ms Illman (once a Conservative) joined the Liberal Democrats, later returning to the Tories but by 1997 she had defected to Labour.

It would seem that with an early sign of a lack of integrity Mrs Bercow was always destined to represent the PLP though with dedication and loyalty such as that displayed by Mrs Bercow I pity the electorate of Westminster should she gain the seat at the forthcoming General Election.

LabourLost believe you may enjoy further reading related to a woman with a past.

Many tomes will be written today and in the future about the cynical content of the speech and how it is in effect a pre-manifesto manifesto so I don’t for one minute propose to add to that weight of words.

Instead, I propose to discuss something I feel is far more newsworthy today as I believe it ’slipped’ under the radar yesterday in the furore of an investment announcement.

Yesterday, Lord Adonis announced that the 10 worst railway stations in England would each get to share £50m. That much we already know.

Fair enough, in the past I have been ‘quietly impressed’ with Lord Adonis and his apparent concern for doing the right thing by the railways but somehow, this just doesn’t sit comfortably with Parlez~me~’n~Tory.

How does Lord Adonis suddenly (1 day prior to a huge swathe of announcements within the Queen’s Speech) decide which stations are to be in his remit for this investment proposal?

What criteria was used for determining the worst stations in the country? Was this a consultative process? If so, with whom and when?

Personally, I believe that the only consultation (external to rail management) was between members of the Cabinet and only very senior members at that.

It is the belief of Parlez~me~’n~Tory that the criteria used was based purely on the best possible chance of a positive return at the General Election. Shall I put that statement into perspective?

Let’s take a look at the stations that are set to benefit and who controls the community. The 2nd line of each entry indicates: MP (Constituency/Benefitting area, Party) Majority (Year entered Parliament):

Station: Barking

Margaret Hodge (Barking, Lab) 8,883 (1994)

Station: Clapham Junction

Martin Linton (Battersea, Lab) 163 (1997)

Station: Crewe

Edward Timpson (Crewe & Nantwich, Con) 7,860 (2008)

Station: Liverpool Central

Maria Eagle (Liverpool, Garston, Lab) 7,193 (1997)
Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside, Lab) 10,214 (1997)
Peter Kilfoyle (Liverpool, Walton, Lab) 15,957 (1991)
Jane Kennedy (Liverpool, Wavertree, Lab) 5,173 (1992)
Robert Wareing (Liverpool, West Derby, Ind) 15,225 (1983)

Station: Luton

Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North, Lab) 6,487 (1997)
Margaret Moran (Luton South, Lab) 5,650 (1997)

Station: Manchester Victoria

Tony Lloyd (Manchester Central, Lab) 9,776 (1983)
Graham Stringer (Manchester, Blackley, Lab) 12,027
Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton, Lab) 5,808 (1970)
John Leech (Manchester, Withington, Ldem) 667 votes (2005)

Station: Preston

Mark Hendrick (Preston, Lab) 9,407 (2000)

Station: Stockport

Ann Coffey (Stockport, Lab) 9,163 (1992)

Station: Warrington Bank Quay

Helen Jones (Warrington North, Lab) 12,204 (1997)
Helen Southworth (Warrington South, Lab) 3,515 (1997)

Station: Wigan North Weston

Neil Turner (Wigan, Lab) 11,767 (1999)

Do you notice a pattern developing?

It is rather obvious that apart from a token Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Independent the rest are Labour; not exactly with the strongest majorities either.

So, we have many Government ministers that were already set to enter the General Election campaign on very shaky ground who can now point to a huge cash investment in their region as evidence of what the Labour Government can and will do for their community. [It would be very interesting to do some analysis on what the breakdown of each local council is for these regions]…anyone wish to do that work?

Expect countless cries of ‘you wouldn’t get this under a Tory Government’ most notably in the voice of John Prescott to ram home hard the ‘working class’ Labour perception.

With the strategic position of the vast majority of these seats, [don't think for one minute they weren't chosen without that in mind] this investment turns out to be not quite what you thought it was yesterday and with the Queen’s speech today this will be all but lost in the noise. This cannot be allowed to happen.

MP’s from all sides, lobbyists and the blogosphere must leap on this and challenge Lord Adonis for the truth behind his rationale.

This post was first published on the Parlez~me~’n~Tory blog.

Lord Mandelson, who once represented Hartlepool as an MP has just been granted a freeman of the town. His new title reads a full 45 words and is:

The Right Honourable Baron Mandelson of Foy in the county of Herefordshire and Hartlepool in the county of Durham, Lord President of the Council, First Secretary of State, and Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Honorary Freeman of the borough of Hartlepool.

If that wasn’t ridiculous enough there are grave doubts about the fairness in which he was granted the new title.

In a straight run-off Lord Mandelson would have been up against Isobel Wilson of the town’s Pansies Breast Cancer Support Group, Wendy McLoughlin MBE, 63, who chairs Hartlepool Families First for disabled children and sports presenter (locally-born) Jeff Stelling. But strange occurrences within the council ensured that any vote against Lord Mandelson would mean that one-out, all-out!

Previously, Hartlepool council has voted on each candidate individually for the honorary title of freeman. One councillor stated that the secret meeting headed up by the ruling Labour group which took place on 5th November was blatant emotional blackmail.

Labour group leader Jonathan Brash demanded a vote to couple Lord Mandelson’s name in with four other nominations for freeman and two for alderman, a total of seven.

The resulting vote was tied at 19-all, with 17 of those 19 votes in favour coming from Labour councillors, including Lord Mandelson’s former agent and close ally, Steve Wallace. The casting vote went to Carl Richardson, the chairman (Labour).

Councillors were then instructed to gain a two-thirds majority to grant all 7 nominations the title, if any attempt to block Lord Mandelson was undertaken, they would have to block popular Sky Sports presenter Jeff Stelling.

A total of 32 votes were cast which, under the two-thirds majority rule, meant 22 votes were needed to secure Lord Mandelson’s freeman title. The result was 22 to ten – with six abstentions.

LabourLost says: Lord Mandelson, you disgust me. Riding roughshod over genuine and good people that have actually done something for the community. Yet another example of the abuse of powers that is endemic within the Parliamentary Labour Party.

Whilst the row, rightly or wrongly continues apace with The SUN v the Government regarding the mother of Guardsman Janes there are individual movements within the PLP to shore up their defences so that those individuals are best placed to capitalise from a most catastrophic defeat.

The latest of these machinations on display is that by one David Miliband MP. It is very clear that Mr Miliband has his sights on a powerful role whether it be in Britain or controlling Britain from Europe.

Forced to make a choice yesterday David Miliband has all but refused the job of foreign affairs within the newly created European structure following the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty preferring instead to show his allegiance to the PLP.

Senior members of the PLP have briefed David Miliband in private that they believe there is still a chance that Gordon Brown would step down before the General Election and that he would be best placed to step into the void.

They have also briefed him that to walk away now would not sit well with the core support as he would appear as a rat leaving a sinking ship.

As a consequence this single act of forfeiture says more about his personal ambition than his desire to do what is best for his country.

A few days ago Ian Craig, the chief schools adjudicator, recommended a range of new penalties to be introduced to punish parents who break school admissions rules by giving false addresses, fibbing about their ‘real’ address and moving house just to personally gain from the postcode.

Fair enough, I can understand that. But who is it that’s behind this mandate?

None other than the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families Ed Balls MP who along with his wife Yvette Cooper MP according to the Telegraph’s MP’s expenses research ‘flipped’ their homes a number of times

After being elected to Parliament for the first time in 1997, Miss Cooper, now the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, designated a modest property in her constituency of Castleford, west Yorkshire, as her second home, and began claiming mortgage interest payments on her parliamentary allowances.

In May 2005, after Mr Balls was elected MP for Normanton, Miss Cooper “flipped” her second home to the family house she shared with her husband and their three children in south London. The couple both began claiming a half share of the £1,466 mortgage interest, a sum of £733 each compared with the £530 she had been paying in Yorkshire.

Two years later, in May 2007, the couple moved again, to a larger, £655,000 property in north London which they designated their second home. Their mortgage interest payments increased to just over £1,031 each.

They also put the bill for the £2,000 cost of removal vans and men on their parliamentary expenses.

…and just in case you thought they were hard up

Yvette Cooper

Job: Chief secretary to the Treasury

Salary: £141,866

Total second home claims

2004-05: £19,428

2005-06: £14,234

2006-07: £15,995

2007-08: £12,219

Ed Balls

Job: Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families

Salary: £141,866

Total second home claims

2004-05: Not elected

2005-06: £13,618

2006-07: £15,979

2007-08: £12,219

I put it to you Mr and Mrs Balls, you potentially gave false addresses, fibbed about your ‘real’ address and moved house just to personally gain from the postcode.

You are no better than those you seek to suppress.

Previously published over at Parlez~me~’n~Tory

David Miliband poured his sycophantic praise on the former Prime Minister yesterday on the Andrew Marr show and is due to redouble his efforts today when he puts a case for a strong UK presence at the centre of a reinvigorated Europe.

LabourLost understands that Miliband has abandoned the idea of running for the new role of EU Foreign Minister preferring instead to shoehorn his former boss into the more powerful role in an attempt to ensure some form of PLP continuity should the forthcoming General Election prove as disastrous as feared.

It won’t be all plain sailing though as along with Poland the BeNeLux countries are proving somewhat difficult and are presenting at least some credible opposition to the Blair campaign efforts.

There is further hope for anti-Blair campaigners in that there are those [within Europe's top posts] who are worried about his forthcoming appearance at the centre of the Chilcot enquiry into the Iraq War.

It is clear from David Miliband’s comments that he is seeking the role for Tony Blair providing Political leaders give the role enough ‘clout’. Yesterday Mr Miliband urged other EU leaders to choose an international figure as president rather than an unknown ‘business manager’.

In one final thought let us not forget that it is the broken manifesto promise of this Labour Government of a referendum on the EU Constitution which became the Lisbon Treaty [simply a name change] that allows the creation of this EU Presidential role; where’s the justice in that?

When you look at it like that you can see why they pushed the treaty through without allowing the democratic process to run its course in our once Great Britain.

It proved to be at the heart of their manifesto and at the heart of the desirous British people.

The public were tired of John Major’s sleazy Cabinet. They wanted change, they wanted to force change and by god they did, sweeping New Labour into Government with Tony Blair as Prime Minister.

The Labour Party spin machine tells a remarkable story of how investment upon investment made good the pledge of education, education, education but whilst history shows the investment was correct the people currently in charge tell quite a different story.

In the 10 years between 1997 and 2007 the core “per pupil” funding rose by 48% in real terms, that equates to £1,450 more per year per child. Fact.

But for all that investment did it go to the right areas and what is the result?

Well, according to a speech given yesterday by Sir Terry Leahy [knighted by the UK Government in 2002 and a current member of Gordon Brown's National Council for Educational Excellence] the standards are woefully low.

Sir Terry who is the boss of Tesco further stated, [because of this] Employers like us are often left to pick up the pieces.

Is Gordon Brown listening? Will he heed the warning?

Previously Tesco has sponsored a number of Labour Party events, though Sir Terry’s criticism will be seen as issuing further evidence to the Government of business turning its back on the party ahead of a General Election.

The moral of the story here is that investment is not enough, correct and accurate targeting and readjustment when and where required is just as important as cash in hand.

This guest post has been contributed by Julian Bray who writes on his Duckhouse blog. Over to you Julian.

Gordon Brown today marked a new all time televised low in his Premiership as he appeared before House of Commons Select Committees and still refused to answer with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ the questions relating to the number of soldier/ troop recruitment requests by the military [2000] and the numbers they actually got [<700].

But what we got loud and clear was a clear message that money ie the Treasury is regulating the two wars we are hopelessly engaged in and that the squaddie or general in theatre can forget about any practical help or back up in the near future.

Come back in six years lads and we’ll have the aircrew fully trained and plied with booze. The choppers might not be ready though as we chose a cheaper spec. than the Americansd so ours had to be made on a later production batch.

Even simple questions like how many operational Chinooks do we have in Affers [8-10] as the soldiers call it. The answer less than a tenth of the operational Chinooks, the Americans have to service and lift the same number of troops.

So lads when you next walk to your objective in the mind bending searing heat just think of Gordon Brown – on holiday now – trousers rolled up, by the Seaside with his family – simply Gordon does not understand the military, has no idea where the money goes or what it goes on.

But where do we go from here? Gordon has this devine right of sticking his head and genitalia in buckets of sand. Our Boys (as The Sun would have it) also have the devine right of sand, billions of tons of it, only it gets in everywhere.

Imagine the soldiers joy to be given large packs of unlubricated rubbers (Durex etc)but we are a bit short in the body armour locker.. but you have the Durex right? Army Orders 34598765-c might read @Take out an unlubricated rubber roll between thumb and first finger, place over the upright and fully reamed…. then the lights went out. No stop messing around, seriously the durex or rubbers are used to keep sand out of the AK47 barrel and they’ve been using them this way for years now….sigh.

About Julian: Julian Bray is a broadcaster, moderator, speaker, journalist and lectures on leadership, company turnarounds, corporate and recession busting strategies, politics, aviation, travel, the City.

The list; in full

- £22,500 of debt for every child born in Britain
- 111 tax rises from a government that promised no tax rises at all
- The longest national tax code in the world
- 100,000 million pounds drained from British pension funds
- Gun crime up by 57%
- Violent crime up 70%
- The highest proportion of children living in workless households anywhere in Europe
- The number of pensioners living in poverty up by 100,000
- The lowest level of social mobility in the developed world
- The only G7 country with no growth this year
- One in six young people neither earning nor learning
- 5 million people on out-of –work benefits
- Missing the target of halving child poverty
- Ending up with child poverty rising in each of the last three years instead
- Cancer survival rates among the worst in Europe
- Hospital-acquired infections killing nearly three times as many people as are killed on the roads
- Falling from 4th to 13th in the world competitiveness league
- Falling from 8th to 24th in the world education rankings in maths
- Falling from 7th to 17th in the rankings in literacy
- The police spending more time on paperwork than on the beat
- Fatal stabbings at an all-time high
- Prisoners released without serving their sentences
- Foreign prisoners released and never deported
- 7 million people without an NHS dentist
- Small business taxes going up
- Business taxes raised from among the lowest to among the highest in Europe
- Tax rises for working people set for after the election
- The 10p tax rate abolished
- And the ludicrous promise to have ended boom and bust
- Our gold reserves sold for a quarter of their worth
- Our armed forces overstretched and under-supplied
- Profitable post offices closed against their will
- One of the highest rates of family breakdown in Europe
- The ‘Golden Rule’ on borrowing abandoned when it didn’t fit
- Police inspectors in 10,Downing Street
- Dossiers that were dodgy
- Mandelson resigning the first time
- Mandelson resigning the second time
- Mandelson coming back for a third time
- Bad news buried
- Personal details lost
- An election bottled
- A referendum denied

It is clear that #labourlost the chance to announce this Policy during their own conference because at that time they did not have the Policy and that they are trying to steal a march on the Shadow Chancellor’s speech at the conference today.

This is not set to be a make or break conference for the party or for the leadership of the party but it is expected to return some tough decisions. Amongst those tough decisions will be issues affecting those out of work in our country, issues affecting savers, issues affecting homeowners and issues affecting business owners among many others.

This will also be the first conference of the New Media age which includes the tools such as Twitter and other social media platforms. Aligned with the conference the Conservative Party is using the Twitter #hashtags of #Con09 and #cpc09 both are valid, both have separate streams of followers so to gain the most exposure to the discussions of the conference and to interact it is wise to use both thereby limiting your 140 characters even further.

During the Labour Party conference the #hashtag that was in use was #lab09 and it is fair to say that even non-Labour voters used the #hashtag to discuss matters relating to the conference. Such civilized use has not been seen thus far this week.

It would appear in another showing of how #labourlost the idea of fair play the Conservative Party #hashtags are being added to and abused. Already we have seen #bigcon09 #cono9 in what one can only assume is an attempt to play the joker with the former and perhaps sway unsure users with the latter.

I blogged a few days ago about how Labour need to learn their lesson and how they really need to move away from the negativity that has beset them for so long, sadly it appears that even as we move into a New Media age they cannot seem to understand that need.

With that in mind and if unchanged down the line I fear for their existence following the General Election.

Monday’s Agenda in brief

Ready for change:
Policy review chairman Oliver Letwin
Shadow Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude
Mayor of London Boris Johnson

Reforming Politics – Accountability and Transparency:
Shadow Commons leader Sir George Young
Scottish Conservative leader Annabel Goldie
Shadow foreign secretary William Hague

Reforming Politics – Decentralisation and Social Action:
Shadow communities secretary Caroline Spelman
Shadow minister for community cohesion Sayeeda Warsi

The NHS:
Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley

The Twitterati are using the #labourlost hashtag in some interesting ways which can be seen within the daily updates on the site.

This morning I noticed a blog post about #labourlost on a blog that I had previously not read so off I went to discover

Saturday, October 03, 2009
Take a look at the #LabourLost campaign

There’s a campaign to help bring together all those putting evidence for Labour’s failures forward on twitter so its easier for people (& esp voters) to follow.

Its all explained here.

I can see a few problems with the idea, espeically screening referals to cull troll tweets, as if trolls could fly . Still intresting to see how it works out.

The LabourLost web site is here and its twitter feed ( the most intresting part ) here.

However, I’m all for attacking the other side with listing their failures etc, the only thing I don’t like is trying to look like one of their sites ( which the web site does ). Other parties do this and it fools no one, but actually damages the integrity of the message.

Posted by Man in a Shed at 11:54 AM 1 comments Links to this post

Labels: #LabourLost, LabourLost

I have removed the links as that is not the point of this exercise. What is, however, is ensuring the right message is given and then confirm that that message has been received and understood.

I was delighted to note that Man in a shed had written about the campaign but was eager to set the record straight on a couple of points, hence my comment to his blog which is longer than the blog post itself

LabourLost.org said…

Good morning, thank you for your post with regards to the #labourlost campaign

I have 2 points to address with regards to your post if I may:

1) You say ‘especially screening referrals to cull troll tweets’ – it is true, this will be an issue but ‘we’ cannot control how the general public use the #hashtag once we provide them with the avenue of exposure we can only hope that it is used constructively and do our level best to stay on top of the screening process with regards to those that are ReTweeted.

In addition I can confirm that no guest blog post will be accepted unless it has been reviewed by at least 1 of the 2 staff involved in the campaign.

Anything smear related will be removed or the post will not be accepted. As we say on the site:

#labourlost is not officially supported by or affiliated to any Political Party

#labourlost is not a smear campaign against the Labour Party or the Prime Minister

#labourlost is not slanderous in anyway

#labourlost is not partisan, it is not conjecture

It is clear we cannot control use of the #hashtag but we can control what appears within the site.

2) You say ‘the only thing I don’t like is trying to look like one of their sites ( which the web site does )’ – again, this is true but not for the reason you may think.

We had set a launch date of 1st October and had therefore built our site and the template a number of weeks prior to this date.

1 week before launch the LabourList.org site revamped their design and relaunched, it was too close to our launch date to change our plans so we launched as originally planned.

One could deduce from this that LabourList.org got wind of our ideas and proceeded to copy the style though of course this could not be proved ;o).

I hope that helps readers understand a little better and we look forward to serving the general public.

Thank you
Best regards
LabourLost.org

That said, I retired for coffee.

A letter from Gordon Brown

Last week we came together as a party to debate the choice for Britain.

In the next few months I will tour the country, meeting the people of Britain to explain our policies, not just on economic recovery and Afghanistan, but from Sure Start and school standards to social care, the NHS, and action on anti-social behaviour.

I will visit every region and every city to speak to people and discuss with the people of the country the choices we face.

I have already said that we are facing the first General Election of the global age. In it the choices are great: between different directions for our country, different choices about economic progress, different philosophies about the future of our public services, different pathways in our relationship with Europe and the rest of the world.

In momentous times like these, the choices cannot be small choices with small consequences: they are big choices with big consequences. The choices we make in the next year will define the future of our country, not just for five years, but for a generation to come.

So I believe it is also right that the parties debate the issues not just in Parliament but in every arena where the public will join in the discussion.

It is right that we set the issues before the British people. Others can work out the details but what’s important for the country is that there is a wide ranging series of television and radio debates with party leaders that are also able to devote attention to the central issues that matter to families: the economy, public services, how we strengthen our communities, and how we work with the rest of the world.

It is right that there will be a strong focus on the leaders’ debates and it is right that in a Cabinet system of government that ministers and opposition ministers also debate the issues in a series of debates on television and radio too.

I relish the opportunity of making our case directly to the people of this country.

Gordon Brown

Well, that’s clear then, finally (on the face of it) the PM has given the public what they want.

The statement goes on to present a simple form

Tell us what question you want answered by the leaders and we’ll make sure it gets considered.

We’d also welcome your views on what format it should be and where it should take place.

First name *
City
Email *

What question would you like to be answered at the debates?

What format do you think the debates should take and where do you think they should take place?

We’d like to send you occasional updates from Gordon Brown and the Labour Party (you can unsubscribe any time). If you don’t want these, please just untick this box.

The Labour Party and its elected representatives may use the data you have supplied

I have slight reservations about the wording used within the open letter from the PM but that is not for discussion within this forum.

I am also concerned about the opt out strategy employed, this should be an opt in issue but what concerns me more is the last sentence that appears truncated.

Interesting use of the words elected representatives as the PM was not elected.

How will you use this data and for what purposes? Is it in accordance with the DPA? I see no Privacy Policy on this page.

LabourLost, what it is

#labourlost is a campaign that has its seed in Twitter in an attempt to bring to the public the general failings of where the Government has made a promise over the past 12 years and failed to keep it. To that ends the campaign utilises the Twitter hashtag of #labourlost.

#labourlost is fair and balanced, it is purely to inform and educate the public in the failings of the PLP during the past 12 years so that they have a fair chance of another avenue to explore their conscience prior to the general election.

#labourlost Tweets are encouraged by the public to highlight the individuals concern over the failings of the Government.

Any and all #labourlost Tweets will be ReTweeted by the @LabourLost account and will by default appear within the Twitter feed on the LabourLost.org site and in the daily and weekly Twitter updates.

LabourLost.org is a blog and Guest Blog Posts are encouraged by members of the public, please see the write for us page for details and guidelines on how to get your post on the site and to bring your concern to the attention of the general public

LabourLost, what it is not

#labourlost is not officially supported by or affiliated to any Political Party

#labourlost is not a smear campaign against the Labour Party or the Prime Minister

#labourlost is not slanderous in anyway

#labourlost is not partisan, it is not conjecture

#labourlost does not have endless resources at its disposal but is willing to work as hard as it can to achieve the aim of educating the public in the failings of the Parliamentary Labour Party. We can only fully achieve this aim with your Tweets and Guest Blog Posts.

Now you know a little more about LabourLost we hope you will support #labourlost.