It feels like a bubble has burst. The five years of Corbynism, which have inevitably left the Labour Party in a dire state, have finally come to an end. Despite inspiring voters in the 2015 Labour leadership long ago, the repeated errors, mistakes, failures on policies, leadership and anti-Semitism meant the party’s eventual defeat last Christmas shouldn’t have been so surprising. After a dull leadership contest, overshadowed by the coronavirus pandemic in its later stages, Keir Starmer has been crowned leader.
In a sense, this event is almost insignificant and trivial. Normally, such a contest would culminate in a grand national conference, the winner bought to the stage to inspire voters right from the start. Instead, Starmer was left to deliver a pre-recorded statement, which obviously focused both on his vision for the nation, providing constructive opposition to the government and rebuilding Labour’s relationship with voters, not least the Jewish community. His victory was impressive, over 52% in the first round, winning more votes than Jeremy Corbyn managed in 2015. Many Labour individuals I follow on twitter, who one could argue were from the Brownite and Blairite wings of the party, sighed with relief when he and Angela Rayner, instead of Rebecca Long-Bailey and Richard Burgon, were announced as the eventual Leader and Deputy Leader. I’m personally surprised the out and out Corbyn candidates didn’t perform better, especially given their wing of the party blames his defeats on Brexit, not himself or the policies. The was seen as a new start, a chance for new leaders and ideas. Starmer faces an uphill struggle. The country requires an opposition. In these awful times, I don’t want parties to play political point scoring for the sake of it. That helps nobody and simply makes politics more vacuous that it already is. But at the same time, I don’t want unquestioned support for the government. While they seem to be relying on the advice and expertise of science, ultimately it is politicians who make the final decisions. Experts only advise. To fail to probe the government on its decisions (or lack thereof) in this time of national crisis would be to fail the nation. An opposition is also needed beyond the coronavirus pandemic. It sounds complacent, but eventually this will come to an end. That is why I have been telling myself at least. The government have a majority of 80 and four years of guaranteed governance ahead of them. Boris Johnson remains strong. Though he is guaranteed to win all voting divisions within the House of Commons, Labour still have over 200 seats. That is a base for scrutinising the government, using their influence on Select Committees and ensuring government operates as best as possible. I want Boris Johnson to be a great Prime Minister if it means people’s lives get better. They will only be an effective government if they are held to account. It is the responsibility of Keir Starmer, and Labour, to ensure this happens. At the same time as being Leader of the Opposition, arguably the worst job in politics, Starmer must rebuild his own party. This is as much about Labour’s internal structures as electorally appealing to the nation. Interestingly, many Corbynsceptic candidates did well in Labour’s NEC by-elections, suggesting that the hold of Corbyn’s ideology is on the wane. Unlike many, I don’t believe Momentum is necessarily a negative force. Like Progress, it will contain its bad apples. I generally hold the view that an entity that inspires people, especially young people, to become involved with politics is no bad thing. Starmer will have to strategically decide their role and influence (if any) throughout his tenure as leader. The public will want decisiveness and action. It is an universally accepted rule that divided parties don't win elections. Starmer’s challenges go far beyond choosing his next Shadow Cabinet. Let’s be blunt, parties exist to win elections to gain a mandate to enact their ideology. As Labour leader, the picture couldn’t look worse. In 2015, the situation wasn’t brilliant with 232 seats. Thanks to a poor Tory campaign, this increased to 262 seats (though was still a defeat) in 2017. Now, he is stuck with the lowest number of seats since 1935. He will have to win back both ‘Red Wall’ seats held under Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown as well as marginal, suburban seats like Redditch and Harrow East that were only held under the Blair years. Given Starmer came up with Labour’s Brexit policy, a disaster with the public, I can't tell whether he is the individual to do this. The best Starmer can hope for is a Tory disaster in government over the next four years. While, in a utilitarian sense, this may benefit Labour, it would mean the country, and the people within, have to suffer. I’m still not entirely sure what Starmer’s guiding vision is. That was, interestingly, one of his strengths in the contest. It was impossible, unlike Richard Burgon or Ian Murray, to pin Starmer’s positions to a mast. Thus, he was able to win support from Blairites who thought he was on their side and similarly from Corbynistas. This ambiguity cannot last. It will be impossible for Starmer to please everyone. A strong leader inevitably will have enemies and dissent. Starmer must be forthright over what he believes regarding Labour’s, and the UK’s, future. Though Rebecca Long-Bailey was seen as the Corbyn continuity candidate, much of Starmer’s policy vision wasn’t that different from Jeremy Corbyn. There was little variation in their key beliefs about the world, with Starmer being unwilling to criticise either the previous Labour government or Jeremy Corbyn. There is some cause for relief. Thankfully, Starmer has ruled out rejoining the EU as Labour Party policy. This was completely the right decision; if Labour hadn’t ever advocated a second referendum, who knows whether the result last year would have been different. The battle over our membership of the EU has been decided. Only in 40 or 50 years time, assuming the EU survives that long, can the status of our membership be questioned again. There are so many other domestic and foreign policy areas under discussion, many of which have been neglected by Labour over the past decades. As I’ve written before, one of the damning aspects of the Corbyn project was its lack of radicalism. Debates in the 21st century relating to public policy are only going to become more interesting. Especially after the coronavirus pandemic, the future of work is seriously going to be under consideration, not least the structure of work and how people work. Again, I’ve mentioned it before, but it would delight me if Labour decided to embrace the radicalism of a universal basic income. Giving people a basic standard of living, it would allow society to have the flexibility to both work and engage in sabbaticals and personal projects. As the UK embraces an ageing population, radical solutions are necessary in relation to social care, who foots the bill and what a satisfying life in one’s twilight years really is. Other matters of personal importance to me include mental health and higher education, all of which Labour has a chance to propose radical policies and ideas on. While Starmer’s personality will inevitably dominate, Labour has the time to construct and formulate bold, enlightening policies. In foreign policy, the UK’s place in the world continues to be questioned. Now we’ve left the European Union, the aim will be retaining our European neighbours as friends and allies. As the same time, the UK’s relationship with the USA remains important (though I loath the phrase ‘special relationship’). Similarly, our connections towards the Commonwealth nations, an excellent collection of independent countries from around the world are significant. Starmer must frame a narrative for how Labour is to respond to those questions and where the UK’s future in a globalised world lies. Tony Blair once said the only advantage of a party being in opposition was that it had time to think. On that, I couldn’t agree with him more. It’s four years until the next general election. While being a forthright opposition against the government, Starmer has time to try and shape the agenda and understand his political philosophy. As an avid politico, I’m not entirely sure what it is. It is vital, then, that he gives time and consideration to choosing a suitable team, sorting out Labour and rebuilding its electoral coalition. All while formulating policy and responding to political events as they happen! Starmer has plenty of questions to answer and decisions to make. It is no easy task. That though, is one of the brilliant things about living in a liberal democracy. The path to power for any aspiring Prime Minister should never be easy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Author:Noah enjoys writing a blog and drinking tea Archives
September 2022
Categories
All
|