The Labour leadership contest isn’t discussing the real barriers to the party winning power

Pictures by Chris McAndrew (CC BY 3.0).

Keith Darlington

We are now in the midst of another Labour leadership election campaign and what has surprised me is that the relentless focus has been on whether the party should stick on the left or move towards the centre. The candidates and pundits have discussed little else.

But over the last four General Elections Labour have lost from the centre under Brown, centre-left under Miliband and hard-left under Corbyn. All of them have come up short.

The problems facing Labour are much deeper and cannot be solved with a different set of policies announced during an election campaign.

The most fundamental problem facing Labour – the ‘elephant in the room’ – is that they’re unlikely to win another election outright under the current FPTP arrangement.

Labour’s problems at the 2019 General Election wasn’t just in their percentage of the vote but also that their vote was poorly distributed across constituencies. Their younger voters tend to be concentrated in urban areas where Labour piled up the votes while Conservative voters are more evenly spread across the UK.

The boundary changes that are expected to be pushed through by the government would make things even worse for Labour. Under the new boundaries, the Conservative Party would increase its majority to 104 if the general election result were repeated.

Add to this the fact that Labour has been replaced in Scotland as the centre-left party by the SNP, and the road to a working majority seems all but impossible for Labour barring a massive political landslide.

During the last century, the Tories were in power for 80% of that time. This could happen again during this century if Labour don’t recognize that the way forward is to embrace electoral reform and show a readiness to work with other parties. The Remain campaign provided a good opportunity for Labour to work with other parties but Corbyn spurned such chances and electoral reform barely got a mention during his time as leader.

But FPTP works against Labour in other ways too, because the Tories have long periods of single-party rule during which time they can abolish many of the good things that Labour did such as sure-start. This would be unlikely to happen under a proportional system because they would not be ruling as a single-party government.

Labour is no longer in a world of two-party politics and will have to work with other parties on the left, such as the SNP, Plaid, and the Greens, if they are to have any chance of winning again. Yet, the Labour leadership contest suggests that they still retain the pretence that nothing has changed and they can win a majority under different leadership.

 

Ambiguity

Another factor which lost Labour the campaign in 2019 was Brexit. But while the leadership campaign has endlessly debated whether the party’s position on Brexit was the right one, they have missed the point that it was the failure to take a position that was so damaging.

Whether Labour liked it or not, the 2019 election was always going to be about Brexit. But Corbyn could not bring himself around to commit to one side or the other. Probably because his tribal background was on the Brexit side, but his party were predominantly Remain.

His neutralism was doomed to failure because poll evidence going back to the summer had shown that Corbyn’s stance on Brexit was almost guaranteed to ensure the Tories stay in power. He found himself on the defensive to the point where he avoided talking about it during the campaign.

Brexit was always a toxic issue for Labour, but, as leader of the opposition, he should have declared his preference – even if it meant he believed that leaving could be the best choice. He would have gained more credibility and may well have gained more votes because politicians are expected to take a lead – especially on issues which will have a devastating effect on our lives for many decades to come.

It also meant that the flaws in Johnson’s Brexit stance was never really challenged. Labour should learn lessons from their Brexit stance –  in particular, that fudged ambiguity does not go down well with voters.

Tribal

Another key issue little discussed during the leadership contest is Labour’s attachment to tribal posturing, which is so off-putting to voters.

For example, Rebecca Long-Bailey was clearly trying to appeal to the Corbyn tribe by giving him 10 out of 10 for his GE performance. Yet, he lost – and lost badly. She has been mocked and criticised for this remark, and it does not seem to have helped her leadership bid.

Our First Minister of Wales has also appealed to the Corbyn tribe – and was rewarded by becoming FM as a result of appealing to the Corbynites. Recently Mark Drakeford went further by saying that Labour should keep its policies intact for the next election.

These are extraordinary comments – particularly given that the UK will be a completely different country post-Brexit along with the likely impact of AI on the economy in five years from now.

As voters increasingly disown attachments to tribes, Labour should do likewise and focus on developing a social democratic vision for the post-Brexit age.

Labour has been a great force for change over many years and helped to transform Britain for the better – particularly for the least well off.

However, if Labour are going to return to power soon, they must undertake some heavy lifting and fundamentally change their approach to winning power.

Otherwise, the next century, like the last, will be a century of Tory hegemony.

Articles via Email

Get instant updates to your inbox

4
Leave a Reply

avatar
3 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
4 Comment authors
Keith DarlingtonRobin Lynnj humphrysPlain citizen Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Plain citizen
Guest
Plain citizen

A very interesting piece especially relating to the candidates desire to identify with tribalism and the consequences thereof.

j humphrys
Guest
j humphrys

FPTP seems to be the main problem for the “UK” as a whole. It will not be removed by the now ex-Conservative government. Scotland becoming independent and joining the European Union does look more likely, as does Irish unity, which means the SDLP will be gone. Wales is very volatile with a new party entering the fray adding to the mix. Artificial Intelligence could impact things, but do we know how? Looking at England’s population stats. and possible problems of No Deal, AI, immigration, plus Trump’s own problems (and being miffed at Johnson on Huawei, he will seek revenge!) means… Read more »

Robin Lynn
Guest
Robin Lynn

“Labour is no longer in a world of two-party politics and will have to work with other parties on the left, such as the SNP, Plaid, and the Greens, if they are to have any chance of winning again.” In the 2019 election the vote share by % of the potential coalition partners to which Keith Darlington refers was as follows: Tory 43.6 Labour 32.2 Green 2.7 Plaid 0.5 SNP at 3.9 Such a coalition would clearly fall short without the Lib Dems 11.5. As to why Mr Darlington chose to omit the Lib Dems from his discussion I will… Read more »

Keith Darlington
Guest
Keith Darlington

Apologies for leaving out the Lib Dems they would be an essential party on the left to work with. Let me also assure you that tribal posturing is something I left behind a long time ago during my youth.