So, congratulations to Jeremy Corbyn on being elected as leader of the Labour Party. Let's be honest, nobody saw this coming four months ago, and I won't be claiming some kind of prescience now. I did ask a question two months ago which seems even more credible now, but I wasn't in a position to offer a credible opinion as to which of the candidates might win.
The rush amongst certain elements of the Parliamentary Labour Party to distance themselves from the new leadership is informative, but not indicative yet. The decisions that Messrs Corbyn and Watson make over the coming days and weeks in terms of a leadership team and of style/approach, will provide more useful evidence of the direction of travel, but will that be a pointer towards the outcome in 2020? I'm not sure. There are too many big events on, or possibly on, the horizon for that to be divined.
There are some amongst my fellow Liberal Democrats who see the result as an opportunity for our party, although the nature of that opportunity is contested. For my part, I sense that the centre of British politics has shifted to the left, although that doesn't mean that we should shift to the left ourselves in such of some newly-defined centre ground. It does mean that, in England at least, there are four distinctive political philosophies in play (I fear that the Green anti-austerity pitch will be lost as once despairing socialists revert to a newly-invigorated socialist Labour Party). That can only be good for the people of this country, and means that we have a space to talk about liberalism, not centrism.
But, let's look at the events on the horizon.
First, a referendum on Europe. What position will a Corbyn-led Labour Party take on this, and how enthusiastic will they be either way? His stance is still unclear, and the campaign in favour of retaining our membership will benefit from the ability of the unions in particular to rally opinion amongst their members. If the referendum is won, the schisms in the Conservative Party will emerge, and a greater fragmentation of their vote is possible. If lost, the next event would be...
Ah yes, another independence referendum in Scotland. And, this time, pro-unionist forces would lose, and why not? The fact that it makes a Labour majority administration in the rump United Kingdom even less attainable is hardly a problem for the Scots. Is a Corbyn-led Labour Party capable of winning in the kind of seats that would be necessary to overcome such a Conservative advantage - places like Nuneaton and Ipswich, to name but two?
These two elephants in the room will define much of the agenda in the years that follow, yet we have no idea how the first, and the consequential second, will play out.
So, this bureaucrat will wait and see. I may be one of the very few that does...
The rush amongst certain elements of the Parliamentary Labour Party to distance themselves from the new leadership is informative, but not indicative yet. The decisions that Messrs Corbyn and Watson make over the coming days and weeks in terms of a leadership team and of style/approach, will provide more useful evidence of the direction of travel, but will that be a pointer towards the outcome in 2020? I'm not sure. There are too many big events on, or possibly on, the horizon for that to be divined.
There are some amongst my fellow Liberal Democrats who see the result as an opportunity for our party, although the nature of that opportunity is contested. For my part, I sense that the centre of British politics has shifted to the left, although that doesn't mean that we should shift to the left ourselves in such of some newly-defined centre ground. It does mean that, in England at least, there are four distinctive political philosophies in play (I fear that the Green anti-austerity pitch will be lost as once despairing socialists revert to a newly-invigorated socialist Labour Party). That can only be good for the people of this country, and means that we have a space to talk about liberalism, not centrism.
But, let's look at the events on the horizon.
First, a referendum on Europe. What position will a Corbyn-led Labour Party take on this, and how enthusiastic will they be either way? His stance is still unclear, and the campaign in favour of retaining our membership will benefit from the ability of the unions in particular to rally opinion amongst their members. If the referendum is won, the schisms in the Conservative Party will emerge, and a greater fragmentation of their vote is possible. If lost, the next event would be...
Ah yes, another independence referendum in Scotland. And, this time, pro-unionist forces would lose, and why not? The fact that it makes a Labour majority administration in the rump United Kingdom even less attainable is hardly a problem for the Scots. Is a Corbyn-led Labour Party capable of winning in the kind of seats that would be necessary to overcome such a Conservative advantage - places like Nuneaton and Ipswich, to name but two?
These two elephants in the room will define much of the agenda in the years that follow, yet we have no idea how the first, and the consequential second, will play out.
So, this bureaucrat will wait and see. I may be one of the very few that does...
6 comments:
In my mind, this is an excellent opportunity for the Liberal Democrats. We are now the only centre party in UK politics. The tories have demonstrated their lurch to the right now they have no LD restraint. From scrapping Human rights laws to reintroducing fox hunting, the tories are like kids in a sweet shop. Labour are now going down the nationalisation/tax everybody/screw the corporations route. With most of their MP's likely to quit, the Liberal Democratic party should welcome MP's with open arms.
We are now the only legitimate opposition to this nasty government, and the only real centre ground party.
Scott,
Two points in response. First, do we want a bunch of Labour MPs who don't really share our values and beliefs? After all, these are the very people who spent five years calling us 'yellow Tories'.
Second, what does a 'real centre ground party' stand for, as opposed to a 'liberal' party?
I agree with Mark. I don't think I would want any of the MPs likely to leave Labour as a result of this. Let them join the Tories, where they belong. And secondly, we desperately need to stop defining ourselves as a centre party. That just means we are defining ourselves in terms of where the other two parties are, not on our own terms. We're liberal, always liberal, essentially liberal, we don't care where the other two parties put themselves, we stand up for people, all people, everywhere.
> His stance [on the EU referendum] is still unclear
Diane Abbott, a prominent supporter, stated with great authority on The World At One that Corbyn would not support leaving the EU.
Frank,
I noted that, although what might emerge from the Cameron-led negotiations may change that.
In response, I would say that our party is one built on sensible pragmatism, as opposed to one held to ransom by other factors. The tories are held by corporations who would ultimately favour zero taxation and slave labour as this would maximise profit. The Labour party are held by Unions who would favour 1 day working weeks, whilst taxing anybody earning over 100K 100%. We are not controlled by either. This is true centre ground politics.
Nick Clegg sensibly went into coalition with the tories in order to introduce a restraining liberal influence in the government. We have seen the result of a tory government without such an influence. To now refuse an influx of defecting Labour MP's who could quite easily more than double our representation in the Commons would seem to be Corbyn-esque in it's blind application of heart over head. Corbyn will never win an election, and if we refuse pragmatism, neither will we.
I believe the destruction of the Labour party represents a real chance for us to challenge for outright government. Surely that is something that is worth compromise. Liberal values can only be implemented from government, not 3rd party politics.
Post a Comment