Isn’t that Andy Burnham’s line? Either way, as much as I appreciate John’s distancing himself from the Labour norm over the past two decades, he hasn’t performed as well as could be hoped in terms of building an electable coalition within the PLP which, like it or loath it, is an undeniably his fundamental weakness.

My main interest in the LRC is the idea of bridging the party with the broader movement as Simon points out, bringing those two groups together in some way. On a local level, the branches (which do need to be more regularised, with more encouragement/assistance to members wishing to get branches going) essentially just operates as a forum again. This isnt necessarily a bad thing, as we get to co-ordinate with other like minded Comrades on local matters, which can then be presented to the broader, local party structure as a united front.

Many people have often commented to me that they arent satisfied with what the LRC is (or isnt) doing, but when pressed further it becomes clear that theyre not sure what they expect from the LRC in the first place, which is something, as a member, I would have to confess to feeling at times.

Simon, on your point about John, he does his best to raise his profile, but as he puts it, he’s not a part of the “london dinner party circuit”, and finds the quest for media coverage an uphill struggle. I’ve wondered wether or not the LRC would benefit from some advice regarding communications strategy, from someone who actually knows what theyre talking about. But I think Hopi hit the nail on the head really in pointing out that we should be looking to our councils, and TU branches for organisational leadership as opposed to the PLP.

And as usual I think Aaron Kiely is full of gushy crap. In the face of a Labour contest in which the actual socialist – rather than Abbott – was excluded by cynical (and piously justified) machinations of the PLP elite, it bears some doing to declare that suddenly the party is becoming more pluralistic.

It’s also not what the article is saying; the article is a demand for pluralism.

Surrender your pom-poms at the door; no zealot like a convert.

The LRC, to date, has not been particuarly inspiring in this role (although it has the right idea in terms of combining labour members with critically supporting outsiders) and as much as I admire John McDonnell and believe he would have made a vastly superior spokeman for socialiam than Diane, the reality is he has simply failed to use the last three years (or more) to set himself up as a plausible leadership candidate.