Labour pains

BEforE the General Election, we were aware of trades union involvement in the appointment of labour Party candidates. the choice of Ed Miliband as leader came through union input.

But the electorate didn’t like what it was hearing and voted to let the Conservatives persevere with policies that were bearing fruit and enabling us to avoid the path followed by Greece.

Until 2010, labour squandered our money and opened our doors to all and sundry. But, rather than review its strategy the party still promotes the individuals who were part of its failed administration and continues to engage with union leaders who threaten to undo everything that has been achieved by hard work and sacrifice.

there’s no doubt that the labour Party has produced some excellent leaders in the past. i was reminded of this when re-reading Dominic Sand- brook’s 2009 article about Clem Attlee (Mail). He wrote that Attlee ‘stood for decency, duty and principle — in stark contrast to today’s pygmy MPs.

‘Attlee’s commitment to helping the poor was more than political posturing. He often dared to think the unthinkable, once telling an audience of high-minded lefties that “their best act would be to get off the backs of the poor”. Unlike Gordon Brown, he recoiled from the idea of a strong central state dictating people’s lives. for Attlee, the welfare state was all about enabling people to stand on their own two feet, not about targets, league tables and Whitehall directives.

‘to Attlee, the idea of downplaying or apologising for Britain’s historic achievements would have been simply unthinkable. Patriotism, he wrote, was “the emotion of every free-thinking Briton”.’

We need a strong, principled opposition and labour would benefit from considering these remarks and distancing itself from the likes of hard-left len McCluskey, re-elected as leader of his union, Unite, after only a 15 per cent voting turnout of its members.

NEIL KELLY, Hove, Sussex.