It’s become routine. We wake up, look at twitter and see another example of a Labour member spouting antisemitic nonsense. Not legitimate criticism of Israel and Judaism, just like the critique of any other religion or state, but vicious tropes demonising individual Jews for the faith they happen to believe in. Sometimes they are suspended, pending investigations that appear never to reach a conclusion. The leadership resolve their opposition to antisemitism before more historic clips that seem, at best hostile, towards Jews appear. From one of the great political parties, this is a tragedy on multiple levels.
Could you imagine a group believing there was an existential threat to their life by any party coming to power in Britain? Until a few months ago, I could imagine such a scenario if the far-right racists of the BNP were ever electorally successful. Yet three Jewish newspapers – the Chronicle, Telegraph and News – came together, revealing clearly the effects of Labour’s scandal on ordinary Jewish voters. What a travesty that a religion contributing to Britain – economically, culturally and socially – for years should feel so turned off and angered. Summer is usually called ‘silly season’ politically. It is the time of fewer news stories, which, in the age of 24 hour news channels, often leads to sensationalised rubbish. However, it is the perfect time, when Parliament isn’t sitting, for oppositions to make their political case more clearly, dominating the agenda with new ideas for Britain. Apart from one speech about the media, receiving a mixed response, there have been no major policy announcements that have broken through into the public sphere by Jeremy Corbyn. Astute members of the shadow cabinet have not exploited this calmer time to splash the front pages with innovative, workable proposals. Labour have also failed on another part of their role: holding the government to account. An opposition has never had so much to oppose and critique at its fingertips. Brexit chaos, prisons in crisis, health and educational reform, Universal credit, local government cuts, climate action, no administration at Stormont…these are just a sprinkle of where the government happens to be failing. Once again, shadow cabinet members and opposition MPs are not making the most of the government’s many weaknesses. Too caught up in their own shameful civil war, Labour are both unable to present themselves as a credible alternative government and emphasise where the current administration is going wrong. The current situation is unfair for ordinary members of the public. Who knows, some may strangely think this government is the strongest in living memory. But for most, even Conservative supporters, the current leaders of Britain represent nothing but weakness and confusion, their clinging to power day-by-day preventing any coherent message and direction. For Labour, an infestation of anti-Semites has prevented any new vision, a country of hope and realism. No wonder a chunk of people feel so politically homeless as to consider starting up a new party. Moderate MPs must decide what it is they stand for. A fine piece by Stephen Bush of the New Statesman suggests a split is inevitable. Yet the only thing Corbynsceptics agree on is an opposition to Mr Corbyn. That is no philosophy to govern Britain by, even if it were electorally popular. This chasm between the leadership and MPs has only been exposed because of the anti-Semitism row. Your average Blairite may have previously stayed quiet because Labour had performed far better than expected in last year’s election, Corbyn having the mandate, if not to govern, to lead the party into the next election. But with few polling leads, confusion over the European strategy and nastiness dominating the summer, the chances of departure do look higher. Conference really is the time for Labour to decide what its guiding beliefs are. Jeremy Corbyn has long supported a party powered by its members. If the party conference isn’t the time for members to have their say on policy, when is? Though I’m personally against a second referendum, it should be debated and considered if its members desire one. Debates over Trident, tuition fees, wide-ranging ideas and thoughts that have the power to change Britain must be discussed. In speeches, shadow cabinet members must fulfil their brief, prioritising detail over rhetoric, ideas over soundbites. Over the last two years, politics has been based around crunch points, occasions where final decisions will have to be reached. Both Labour and the Tories have fudged away on multiple occasions, so much confectionary that their shop of sugary delights would never go out of business. This autumn however, as Brexit draws inevitably closer, tight votes in the Commons ahead, Labour must have a clear, coherent policy. All its MPs can agree the government is failing but a compromise that pleases Chris Leslie and Kate Hoey will be harder to reach. Only when the party is united around multiple ideas, sorting out its own issues, can it begin to expose the flaws across the green and red benches. How can Labour be saved? It is possible to argue, even with Brexit agreement and opposition to the government, the gap between different wings of the party is just too wide. Disagreements over foreign, defence and economic policy are too wide-ranging, the prospect of standing on a left-wing manifesto where Labour have a good chance of winning impossible for some. Well, many of the alleged proponents of a new party, such as Chuka Umunna, have dismissed the idea. More importantly, in a first-past-the-post system, the current choice is between Labour and the Conservatives. Like the SDP, it would, more likely than not, split the liberal vote and guarantee the Tories another five years in office. For most Labour MPs, that prospect is surely not worth the tiny chance of a new party’s success. To heal a frosty relationship with the Jewish community will take lots of time. The scandal has been dealt with appallingly, members who espouse such hateful remarks remaining unsanctioned. Labour must earn the trust and support of Jewish people again. Adopting the full definition of anti-Semitism, which does allow much rightful criticism of the Israeli government and support for Palestinian rights, seems unquestionable. While that would only be the starting point for getting relations back to where they were, along with a convincing narrative over Labour’s plans for the future, not least with the EU, decided by party members, the chance of a split might just decrease.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Author:Noah enjoys writing a blog and drinking tea Archives
September 2022
Categories
All
|