I am not the greatest fan of The Observer's Andrew Rawnsley. He is a man who can instinctively find the middle: the line of least defence most likely to not alienate too many of his sources whilst appeasing as many of his readers as possible. This is triangulation at its most obvious. This, though, seems true to me, in the sense that he thinks it:
When we get to the very edge of the abyss — and that moment is alarmingly close — my hunch is that parliament will act. I suspect that enough Tories share Sir Oliver's dread of no deal and what the consequences would do to their party. It's only a hunch, mind, and one based on the fragile assumption that the Conservative party still has some instinct for self-preservation and a residual capacity to think rationally.
I think it's true because it's the hunch that, I think, underpins the Tory lead in the opinion poll the Observer also publish this morning. Both are based on the misguided belief that somehow the Tories always sort the mess out.
The reality is that they don't. They did not in 1992 and by 1997 they had blown it, badly. From 2010 inwards it's hard to find a shred of evidence to support the idea. But the belief remains. Even without evidential support.
What's scary about it is that this suggests that no deal is Labour's best hope. And I regret to say it, but in party political terms it probably is. As I was told by an influential member of Corbyn's team in March 2016, Brexit was a Tory fight and Labour just needed to watch it out to win from it.
That was a position grossly negligent in political terms. But nothing has changed as far as I can see. That's what Labour are doing. It's a plan predicated on a no deal. And it's predicated on chaos. And that Labour can win from this. Which is thought to be a price worth paying.
That is a form of politics in which I wanted to play no part. I still think it wrong. I am, and have only ever been, solution focussed in my interests. In other words, the aim has always been to say simultaneously there are problems and there are solutions available. That's the antithesis of Labour's Brexit strategy.
Right now Labour's strategy is playing very badly for the party.
That may change.
But the price will be unacceptable.
The Tories have been appalling on Brexit. Unforgivable, for many. But they were probably that for most of those people, anyway.
Labour's plan has lacked principle, leadership and, if one might be blunt, any plan barring beating the Tories if and only if they really do fail in the worst possible way. That's it.
I fear there will be a significant price for that too.
A person in Cambridge told me they wished they could vote SNP yesterday. I can understand why. The desire for a party with cohesion and a unifying idea is high.
English politics might wait a long time for something like the SNP to come along. Until long after they have gone, maybe.
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:
“A person in Cambridge told me they wished they could vote SNP yesterday.”
Was this person wearing a kilt by any chance….?
Given the appalling media coverage, and lack of coverage the SNP gets, that says a lot for the ability of news to spread beyond the strict constraints of the mainstream.
If a few more Scots pick up on the rumour that they have a government which is admired ‘abroad’, maybe we’ll get the chance to see what a cohesive government can do without being hobbled by what has become increasingly to behave like a malign foreign power. (?)
And I think the person in question was also aware that the SNP has its own issues….
“And I think the person in question was also aware that the SNP has its own issues….”
A political party without its issues would be a rare creature indeed. Possibly one we would not wish to meet.
One the single occasion I had the pleasure of meeting Nicola Sturgeon, I suggested she would know when the time came to step down from the leadership, because all her advisors would say is ‘Yes, Nicola. No Nicola. Three bags full Nicola.” she laughed and said she thought that was not much danger of that !
“What’s scary about it is that this suggests that no deal is Labour’s best hope.”
With the standard proviso, of course, that the Tories are rent in twain again in the process, (and have a very unpleasant and divisive leadership contest). Yes, I know they are split, but they still function as a voting block and that’s all that counts in the final analysis in our arcane parliament.
It is not incompetence that makes Tories unelectable, but division, and May has known this all along. To have held her rats in one sack for so long is her only achievement to date.
Given the sort of intellectual foundation showcased the other day on the understanding of the economy…. the prospect is indeed scary because I see little evidence that Labour in government will be able to hold themselves, let alone the country, together, nor that they have a coherent strategy to govern, any more than they have shown a coherent strategy on Brexit. If pushed would the PLP actually back Corbyn in a confidence motion ….I don’t know, but it could be a very short Labour administration.
And it has to win an election first ………..
Something like the SNP did come along.
A single-issue party that blamed others for the country’s failings, said the solution was to split off from its largest trading partner, and had no idea how to achieve that in practice
It was called UKIP.
Then you have no idea what the SNP is
What’s with the SNP love in? They are not going to govern Britain so they are irrelevant. Are you trying to get on their payroll?
I quoted a comment
And a love in?
Have you noticed how hard I circuses this plans last year?
Pull the other one
The SNP are quite obviously all about blame politics. Everything that is good they claim credit for and bad they say it is down to the union. Don’t mention the Barton formula.
They have pulled a con trick for a generation now where they have built a myth that people, and their priorities, in Scotland are somehow different to England.
I think when you remove the glaze it is just an anti-English party that sows division.
With respect, that is complete nonsense
Brian Danvers says:
Something like the SNP did come along. [It was called UKIP.]
A very ill-fitting analogy, Brian. Chalk and cheese. Apples and oranges. No comparison really.
UKIP was never really a political party; it was a pressure group. It still exists but shelters in the Conservative party that David Cameron assimilated it into in the hope of diffusing it’s more unpleasant aspects. The present UK government illustrates the folly of creating a church so broad that it is splitting aisle from aisle. The Labour opposition suffers from a similar philosophical spread.
The single issue parties in Scotland currently are the Scottish branch of the Conservative party (obsessed by unionism apparently for reasons of sentiment). And the Scottish Labour Branch office preoccupied with mere survival and apparently devoid of a reason exist.
A PR voting system would have been a better way to accommodate that form of extreme group. It’s voice could have been heard in parliament and dealt with (and I don’t for a moment deny its legitimate role in voicing the frustration of its constituency).
As an independent nation, Scotland will develop (having already the benefit of a PR electoral system) a range of parties representing the various constituencies of Scotland across the whole political spectrum. I expect it will function remarkably well. Unlike the bear garden which is Westminster.
Historians viewing this period of our history with the advantage of hindsight, may well conclude that the crucial referendum result in the UK, was the one which rejected the opportunity to introduce a voting system fit for democratic governance. The rest, they may conclude, is history. !
Those waiting/ looking for that alternative might just turn increasingly to the Greens, as they’re doing Germany. Amongst all the rubbish politicians on display here Lucas has stood out as an excellent exception.
I would have Caroline as PM in a national coalition government to sort out the mess right now
Sadly I think Caroline would find it impossible- not enough MPs who would support a Green agenda and who would undermine her and green policy at every opportunity, resulting in the complete death of the Green Party.
Just hope that this whole Brexit fiasco and Labour’s handling of it will produce many more green MPs at the next election – but I’m not holding my breath.
I have long been envious of Scotland – its geography and aspects of its legal system. And I have never ever been received there with nothing but friendliness.
I remember going up there on a trainspotting trip and we went to Eastfied TMD in Glasgow to see the locos on shed in the early 1980s. The burly shed foreman asked where we had come from and we told him we’d come on a Chartex special from Nottingham.
I couldn’t really understand the astonished, broad Glaswegian accent that greeted that piece information, but he only went and pulled a bottle of malt and a couple of glasses out of his desk and insisted that my Dad who was with us shared a wee dram (is it?) with him for the journey back. And he let us look around the depot too.
I have to concur that the SNP certainly seem to have their shit together. In the coming years, they will need to have.
Pilgrim wrote:
“And I have never ever been received there with nothing but friendliness.” Tricky devils those double negatives, eh no?
On a more serious note, I think there is a different political mindset in Scotland which has been shaped by: Scotland’s role in the shaping of socialism in the UK and a disappointment at how it has played out in Scotland in recent times, an understanding of the illogicalities and biases of the UK system of governance (born out of long and painful experience) and, the deep-rooted legacy of Enlightenment thinking based on its rational approach to analysis of issues and the challenging of received thinking and practices.
Put all of these together and it’s easy to see why, outside of the land- and capital-owning class, Scotland has tended to vote left of centre and it’s easier to understand the disenchantment with Labour, which for too long looked on Scotland as vote-fodder to boost its benches at Westminster. This opened the way for the SNP to occupy the centre-left as Labour in Westminster drifted to the right. Add in the deliberate destruction of Scotland’s (and the North of England’s) traditional heavy industries under Thatcher, and the deceptions and blatant lies over North Sea oil, and it’s clear to see how SNP got a strong foothold.
Going forward, it is essential that plans for future independence embrace a separate Scottish fiat currency and sound economic planning based around MMT. That needs to start as soon as possible in order to educate the mass of the people that there is a viable alternative to neoliberal orthodoxy.
I have long since felt that the most powerful prayer in the entire universe is a collective “HELP!” uttered from the depth of the soul. If ever we were in need of that prayer it’s now and we all feel it UK wide.
Thank you Prof. I would like to say that the main reason I keep returning to this blog is because of the excellent economic and tax content but alas I don’t have the relevant entry qualifications to make enough sense of it to influence others, though I yearn to. Not for the first time I have been jealous of your sons that they have you as a nightly resource. So often I’ve thought I would like you to teach me personally what you know about how money works. Perhaps I should have spent more time concentrating on maths and less on falling in love in my formative years, but you know Professor Murphy, the main reason I keep coming back here is because I am so appreciative that you continue to hold a candle for the light which is the potential future Scotland. We have no mainstream media to support our vision of a fairer Scotland. Everything , and I mean everything in the Scottish news has been dictated by the UK government’s agenda and I (and many others) am so tired of being a voice in the wilderness. So many Scots have good instincts but the majority are busy with their lives and trying to make a living and simply don’t have the time to extrapolate the fact from the fiction, the reality from the propaganda. You are right. Brian Danvers has absolutely no idea of what the SNP is but you do, and I thank you for it.
Thank you
I admit debate here is lively sometimes!
Watching the debates in the HoC. I feel , more and more frequently, that the only clear, consistent and rational opposition to this incompetent Government is primarily provided by the S.N.P with contributions from Caroline Lucas, the lone voice of the Unionist M.P. and some Chairs of Select Committees. Watching the machinations of the two front benches I now feel only a resigned despair.
I would suggest a name for this party.
English Nationwide Democratic Party.
It is the nationwide that is the important part.
I was not asking for a nationalist party
God knows, I have had enough of English nationalism
I’m sorry I didn’t express myself very well, I was looking for a slightly left-of-centre party that was literally nationwide oriented – i.e. not London finance-centric.
Maybe others can suggest something better
Indeed, but you must admit that The END party has a certain ring to it (barring the unfortunate similarity to the E.N.D. League).
It’s really embarrassing that as soon as you put “english” in front of something you come over as a fascist. What has happened to us? I know – empire.
Sadly politicians have got into a habit of offering rugby ‘hospital passes’ to the next likely incoming government -both sides now do it. Eg No planning for public works by Browns Labour Govt, seeming impossibly tight budgets by Chancellor Clarke (the Brown windfall tax on utilities with dividend tax attack made the figures work to the detriment of the non voting pension funds)
Working for the national interest and the nation gets pulled apart these days to the extremes. Only a large majority government provides the healthy stability with the crankies marginalised and at no risk to passing legislation. That allows MPs supportive of the national interest but not due to local interests to vote for the betterment of the country and keep their job. One of the benefits of first past the post system.
Sadly we have had tight majoritys for a decade so more extremes and more localism vs national interest.
Gavin says:
“Only a large majority government provides the healthy stability with the crankies marginalised…[…..]One of the benefits of first past the post system.”
Well that’s an extraordinary way to view our recent political history. Given that the two big majority governments we’ve had recently were the ‘crankies’. And FPTP post gave them their majorities on the same sort of proportion of the popular vote as the 30% of the population in favour of Brexit.
What FPTP has created is two rainbow coalition parties with no philosophical integrity, fighting internally, and elected by default, dependent on which the voters reject as being more divided and least coherent at any given time. That is not a system which gives a democratic mandate in my opinion.