People are beginning to realise, with a sense of dull awareness, that we are heading into the most enormous political void in this country.
There is a sense of resignation about Labour's pending victory in the general election. There is acceptance that it is going to happen, and simultaneously very little enthusiasm for this outcome.
The sense that being rid of the Tories is a necessary but nonetheless insufficient condition to guarantee our future well-being is widespread. That sense is coupled with a very limited belief that Labour will address almost any of the issues that we, as a country, face.
Pollsters suggest that the support for Labour is definitely enough for them to win but that it is very thin in the sense that it could very rapidly disappear if they then fail to deliver anything the electorate wants. Given that no one expects that Labour will deliver, most especially on the economy (on which see my comments elsewhere this morning), the likelihood that there will be a collapse in voter support for Labour is very high indeed.
So, what happens then?
It is, I think, possible that the Tory collapse will prove to be terminal at this election. Parties can recover from near-total collapse. The LibDems appear to be doing so. But that's different from doing so when you have delivered five dud prime ministers in fourteen years. In that case, the possibility that Reform might replace the Tories as the UK's party of the far-right is real, with Labour taking on that role for the centre-right.
So what will be the reaction to that? That is the real question because, as Neil Lawson of Compass noted in the Guardian yesterday:
Data from ParlGov shows that, on a matrix of four key measures, UK voters favour the left over the right. Over 40 years and 11 elections, voters have cast on average 57% of votes for parties deemed to be on the left, making the UK the most progressive of the 15 nations in a sample including Sweden, Norway, Finland and Germany. And yet, because of our first-past-the-post voting system, we end up with the most rightwing governments.
If Labour proves, as I suspect, that they are incapable of governing from the right wing and are rejected as a result, the void will not be on the right -where Labour will remain - or on the far right, where Reform will be treated with as much contempt by the majority as they are now. Instead, the void will be on the left, where most of the UK electorate are.
What will those parties to the left of Labour do in reaction, in other words? Can the Greens, LibDems and SNP - plus any newcomer party, which cannot be ruled out - cooperate in any way at that time to deliver three things?
One would be the electoral reform required to send Labour the way of the Tories just five years later.
The second would be a coalition for government, which PR is likely to require of them.
Third, the demand will be for a vision of how they can deliver what this country actually requires, which is:
- a sustainable future
- a focus on equality
- the end of bias towards wealth and large corporations
- an increased sense of well-being
- decent jobs, housing, education and health and social care
- an end to discrimination against the poorest, the most vulnerable, the sick and those with disabilities
- the rebuilding of community
- the recreation of purpose
- permission to be the nation(s) we want to be
I think all that is possible, together with fair incomes for all in jobs where insecurity is not the most hallmark of the job. But can those parties be persuaded of that? This is the real challenge for the next five years.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
But what exactly do the Lib Dems stand for economically?
They have never been faced with the hard choices of being in power in the last century and on the one recent occasion that they were they went with austerity.
Who knows?
Or the SNP, come to that
This will be the challenge
All I can say is they are more realistic than Labour whilst the Greens are developing plausibility
The Lib Dems have always had a faction of economic head bangers, tufton street, Mark Littlewood , and a more progressive economic side, in any future coalition the progressive element should be encouraged to join, and the head bangers given short shrift .
Problem with LDs is the Orange Book adherents – straight down the line neoliberalism.
They still hold sway at senior levels in the party.
I accept that is true
Readers know that I and another are supporting independent candidates. Some are very good indeed and have excellent ideas on energy, food and a host of other areas. Most of these ideas focus on local approaches. I have a sense that in some respects we are heading back to the 19th century, where municipalities delivered infrastructure – not the central gov, with the difference that this time local approaches will be somewhat smaller in scale. These approaches won’t solve the mega problems (water & sewage) but could start to address things such as energy costs and food as well as something that has been eroded over the last 50 years: community – everything has been atomised – “nuclear families” eh?
One thing for sure, given that central gov has been hijacked by the neo-libs – alternatives are needed and a focus on local could deliver.
@Mike Parr: Localism (local government, local provision of services, local business/economy) is great in many aspects, including reduced impact on the environment (eg ‘food miles’; although with caveats around security of supply).
But if central government continues to be captured by neoliberal ideologies and corporates; will not mandate revenue-raising and planning-control and other necessary powers to local authorities; continues to starve them of funds in the name of ‘fiscal rules’; and in extremis imposes central direct rule… how can we get any effective local action?
Look at how the Local Electricity Bill was ‘killed’ – so that community ‘local grids’ outside the big corporates’ grasp could develop…
Didn’t the rise of the city corporations and their provision of public goods take place in the era of industrialisation and growth, relatively ‘light touch’ central government as much concerned with Empire as domestic matters, in which a ‘penny rate’ for the city council (and quite a few bequests – certainly in my city of Sheffield) could fund a lot?
Put very simply until you have a majority of voters having Fiat Money Understanding (FMU) the country will continue to suffer from Neoliberal lack of caring.
I do wonder if an unofficial coalition formed of the APNI, The SNP, PC and The Greens could during the next parliament work out a progressive approach to defeat FPTP. With the two far-right parties and the right of centre Labour party out of step with the majority of the population, perhaps putting together an electoral pact for 5 years, to give independence referendums for all four UK nations (& perhaps sub nations within England) with progressive tax plans to rebuild the equity within the UK. Part of that could be electoral reform, including fixed term elections, STV including none of the above, and a requirement of 66% majority in both chambers (assuming UK retain dicameral system) and a 70% votes cast to repeal the act in whole or part. (Similar though lower percentages are required of trade unions for recognition and strike action!)
The rise in tactical voting suggests the public is agrreable to such a mature and grown up approach to a nation currently barely in the top 20 richest and in 5 years not in the top 30. (GDP per capita)
That may gain some traction – not forgetting that Farage is also in favour of PR. But if LINO get the huge majority predicted they would need to coax some LINO backbenchers to break ranks to get sufficient numbers to pose a real challenge rather then just be swatted away as an irrelevance.
“There is a sense of resignation about Labour’s pending victory in the general election”. Doesn’t resignation come after the result – after an election – not before? Are we to give up before we even vote?
Why should the the electorate be resigned to Labour’s projected majority? There’s no need to accept the vile Tory or Labour party’s positions on, e.g., child poverty – Labour won’t bring them out of it but will make the wealthy wealthier. Why should we accept the destruction of our NHS by some unprincipled, corrupt MPs. There’s nothing inevitable about this if we don’t allow them the power. Dump them!
Vote SNP, Plaid Cymru, Greens, Liberal Democrats or your local independent. Mr Feinstein toppling Starmer – what a delicious thought. Sunak losing his seat – wow! – and many more besides. Vote for those who have some principles, who stand for something and for the people they represent – not for those who are in it to enrich themselves at the expense of our countries’ and our children’s futures. That would be real change.
What an appalling thought that we will just ‘resign’ ourselves to it.
People power only happens once every 5 years – we should use it well.
I think people have resigned themselves to this as the way to be rid of the Tories
Is that really the pinnacle of their ambition for these countries – replacing the Tory arse-cheek with the Labour arse-cheek – swapping one for the other ad nauseam. Haven’t we suffered enough of these corrupt so-and-sos.