'The 2015 Election one year on; reflections & predictions (Part 2)' by Phil Larkin
In part 2 of his post, guest blogger Dr Phil Larkin reflects upon the prospects of Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party and he predicts that the SNP has reached the peak of its powers.
THE
2015 ELECTION ONE YEAR ON: REFLECTIONS AND PREDICTIONS (Part 2)
Corbyn and the
Labour Party
Jeremy
Corbyn was made Labour Party leader in September 2015, after being nominated
for the ballot by a number of Labour MPs, some of whom, like Sadiq Khan and
Margaret Beckett, are kicking themselves for being so foolish. Corbyn was
elected leader by over 60 per cent of the Labour Party membership, despite the
reality that his views run counter to the vast majority of the Parliamentary
Party on most key issues. During Ed Miliband’s time the rules on Party
leadership were altered to give the membership a bigger say in the decision,
and it was possible to join up online prior to the election for a fee of £3. I
suspect that many who voted for him were younger members of the population with
little or no memories of Labour’s travails during the 1980s. There are no such
excuses for those who remember Labour’s fortunes during the 1980s, in
particular the 1983 election; they are, quite frankly, old enough to know
better.
As
Opposition leader, in the estimation of those who supported him, Corbyn would
trigger a massive renaissance of interest in politics among the youth of the
country, terrify the Tory frontbench, and move the entire ground of British
politics. As I predicted at the time, he has done nothing of the kind. He has
proved just as wooden, plodding, cranky, and dogmatic as I believed him to be
last summer. Corbyn’s political views petrified at some point in the 1970s and
have not altered since. Yes, he has permitted those who voted for him to
congratulate themselves on being so pure in their left-wing beliefs. He and
John McDonnell have also guaranteed hours of fun for those who enjoy
participating street protests and demonstrations which make them feel that they
have achieved something but in reality all they have achieved is to alienate
the wider electorate.
The
main reason why Corbyn is always bound to be a disappointment to his followers
is because, again, they attributed to him qualities which they wanted him to have, rather than seeing
him for himself (the same flight from reality which predicted a Labour/SNP win
in the 2015 election). To govern, as they say, is to choose, and Corbyn is not
capable of the difficult choices of government. He has been accused of being anti-Semitic,
a charge which he refutes, and I am definitely inclined to agree with his
rejection of this charge. He is, however, altogether too comfortable in the presence
of those who are. His entire leadership has been epitomised by the appointment
of Seumas Milne, an apologist for Stalin, as Labour’s Executive Director of
Strategy and Communications. How can anyone believe that this is going to make
the Party more electable in 2020? I firmly believe that anyone who states
either that Corbyn will become Prime Minister or that he will change the nature
of UK politics does not, at heart, really believe this. It is simply recitation
of dogma.
There
has been talk about a possible coup against his leadership should the local
election results in May prove dismal for Labour. I am not sure what the results
of the local, London Mayoral, and London Assembly elections, will bring for the
Party, but frankly I am sceptical about, first, whether there will be any type
of coup against Corbyn, and secondly, whether a leadership challenge (even
successful) would benefit Labour in any meaningful way. It is likely that a
future leadership election would produce a result similar to that of September
2015 should Corbyn still be on the ballot. Even if Labour MPs were to stage a
coup against him, leaving his name off the ballot (which, technically, they
could do under the Party election rules) this would provoke open civil war
between the MPs and the Party membership, fought out in the unforgiving glare
of media publicity. It is always a good policy to stop digging when you are in
a hole.
Also,
I believe that by the mere act of putting Corbyn in power, Labour has already
forfeited the 2020 general election. It is probably best to allow him and
McDonnell either to step down of their own accord, or wait until the result of
the 2020 election, and then hang it firmly around the necks of both men, the
MPs that supported them, and those in the membership who put them there.
I
am convinced, however, that Labour will govern
the UK again. It will require much hard work in purgatory, though. Perhaps the
best strategy for the moderate, centre-right wing of the Party is to look
beyond 2020, and prepare for the future. It is significant that MPs such as Dan
Jarvis and Tristram Hunt are examining the question of how the Labour Party
might have relevance in a fast changing society and an economy increasingly
dominated by technology. Jarvis especially is cognisant of the great changes
which have taken place in UK society and economy since the days of the
Beveridge Report and the great Labour victory of 1945. He also notes the reality
that the social mobility which characterised the post-War generation appears to
have stalled: it is a sobering thought that it could be more difficult now for young
people to improve their life circumstances to whatever level talent and
intelligence allows them than it was for their parents and grandparents. Some
of this is undoubtedly due to the growth in inequality between rich and poor
which has accelerated over recent decades. This inequality is
self-perpetuating: although real talent can always rise, it is still much
easier to succeed commercially or professionally if you come from the right
background, went to the right school, and speak with the right voice.
Part
of the solution to inequality, as Tony Blair asserted years ago, is obviously education.
Where Blair and New Labour perhaps got it wrong was in focusing almost
exclusively upon traditional academic style and university education. The aim
of his Governments was to get 50 per cent of all 18 year olds into higher
education, which in theory was a great idea, but too many young people ended up
studying for pointless degrees, leaving them chasing an all too small a number
of jobs in services industries and financial services. Strangely, the Tories
appear more pro-active on the idea of technical education and hi-tech
apprenticeships, with Lord Baker championing the establishment of greater
numbers of University Technical Colleges in England and Wales to provide such
education for new generations of young people, with a view to them forming part
of the labour market immediately on leaving school.[1] These are foundations on
which a future centre-left Labour Party can build. I still believe, like Lord
Healey, that Labour will be better equipped to manage and govern this
technically orientated economy and society better than the Tories.
Sturgeon and the
SNP
As
I wrote in a previous article, the SNP is riding high at present. Its present
surge will almost surely permit it to sweep the board in the Scottish
Parliamentary Elections, and probably do extremely well in the 2020 general
election (although perhaps not quite as well as in 2015). As I also wrote,
however, the almost total victory of the SNP in 2015 will eventually prove its
Achilles heel: from their present position, there is only one direction for the
Party’s fortunes to go, and that is down. With each passing day in executive
office in Scotland the SNP becomes viewed increasingly more as “the
establishment” north of the border, and as Labour’s result in Scotland in 2015
demonstrates, political establishments can be knocked down in an instant.
Furthermore, as time passes the SNP will be pressed to make the difficult
choices on taxes and public spending which the Scottish Parliament and
Executive will soon have the legal authority to make, meaning that it will be
increasingly less easy for them to blame Westminster for such difficult
choices. In addition, as I have set out above, the victory of the Remain
campaign in June will reduce the chances of another referendum this generation
will be reduced almost to zero: what then will the point of the SNP be? I
believe SNP’s story over the next ten years will be that of decline.
[1] I increasingly think that there is
something in the words of the comedian Alexei Sayle, who said in an interview
that the political right make mistakes only once, while the left seems fated to
make the same mistakes several times over.
Comments