"The deputy leader role entails responsibility without power. The holder has to plough through screeds of internal party business that is of interest only to political maniacs, barrack-room lawyers and those trying to exploit the party's procedures for their own ends, or some special cause that would embarrass the leader. The holder is expected to rebut these, especially on behalf of a leader who is actually running the country, while assuring their promoters that they really have their interests at heart."
"the prospective future office holder should take the chance to abolish the post and snuff out the campaign with it. As one who toiled some moons ago for an especially prominent holder, Denis Healey, I can confirm that it is a truly awful job: fully meriting the estimation of John Nance Garner who, having served as vice-president of the US between 1933 and 1941, declared the subsidiary role to be not worth a bucket of warm piss."
Keir Starmer's enforced reshuffle and revelations compelled Peter Mandelson's sacking, prompting consideration of the deputy leadership. The deputy leader role combines heavy ceremonial and administrative burdens with little real power. Duties include handling arcane internal party business, rebutting cause-driven complaints, receiving delegations and foreign visitors, accumulating unmanageable greetings-card obligations, and performing endless dinners, speeches, awards and photo opportunities. Former insiders describe the role as thankless and operationally draining; historical comparison labels the office as effectively worthless. Abolishing the deputy leadership would prevent a drawn-out campaign, reduce party managerial burden, and spare a prospective office-holder an onerous, powerless position.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]