Anyone who caught the Labour hustings debate at 7pm last night (what kind of hard-working British family gets home and ready for telly by 7?) may well not tune in again until 2020. It was not exactly riveting stuff. There was lots of talk of 'not old or new Labour' and 'aspiration' and 'understanding people's concerns' but very little meaty political distinction to get your teeth into. Kendall, Burnham and Cooper talked mostly in platitudes. Corbyn was the only person using plain language and discussing actual ideas.
Our verdict this morning handed the victory to Kendall, however. The relative newcomer is not tainted by the past and is a more amiable candidate than her two other centrist contenders. But her politics are, on the current evidence, so far to the right of the party one might question whether a victory from her would really mean all that much.
Elsewhere we take a look at yesterday's underreported Lords debate on the medicinal use of cannabis and the growing anger over the delay to Chilcot's report on the Iraq war. The rhetoric on that latter issue is getting tougher and tougher, to the point that he is now being accused of betraying those affected by the war. Downing Street has clearly lost patience with him. | |
No comments:
Post a Comment