The Hartlepool by-election result is a wipeout for Labour:
That is only the second by-election gain for a party in office in 40 years.
It is the first time Hartlepool has not had a Labour MP in 60 years.
And I know all the excuses, like the right-wing vote being split for years. And I really don't care about them. The simple fact is that if the people of Hartlepool think that the Tories - who so very obviously do not act in their best interests - have a better narrative for government than Labour do then Labour has got something very deeply wrong.
And I agree with them. It is exceptionally hard to find a reason to vote Labour right now. There is no reason to do so. Labour's current vision is about as exciting as pink blancmange, and a bit less enjoyable. And I can't ever recall having had an enthusiasm for blancmange.
I have absolutely no doubt that Labour will go into its usual left and right fights, with Starmer driving for the right. But this split is in itself meaningless.
The Labour left that was tried for a few years did not deliver, not least because as I saw from close quarters John McDonnell never got over deficit paranoia, whilst the social vision of many in the left, with its obsession with identity politics, alienates many, including the young who implicitly agree with what it promotes.
And to be blunt, the Labour right has literally no vision at all, and has not done since the third way was exposed as simple managerialism with no principles to sustain it.
The left - and I say the left deliberately because I do not know where Labour now fits into this - needs three things.
The first is a belief that government can act for the common good. It lost this before Blair came to power. Remember, Blair and Brown actually ran government surpluses for a while - taking money out of the economy rather than using their majority to effect change. The markets mattered more than people. I can honestly say that People's QE changed that. It's just a shame that, as I predicted in 2015, it's taken a Tory to deliver it.
The second is a story as to what this common good is. Without narratives there is no such thing as politics and Labour has been bereft of a narrative for so long it does not know what they look like now. This narrative should be about freedom from fear. It is then about jobs, fair pay, investment in communities, providing homes, ensuring there is a Green New Deal, rebuilding the NHS, providing training that people want, where they want it, recreating the social safety net, and most of all about providing support so that hollowed out communities can have a purpose again. This requires radical levels of investment, clear direction, a focus on goals and a willingness to act in ways that Biden is showing but which Labour has forgotten is even possible.
Third, Labour, or whoever replaces it if it is not willing to change, has to make clear how different it is from the Tories, and not ape them, which it has done now for so long that it is hard to recall when there was ever red water between them. And again, before I am told that Corbyn was different do recall Labour had a fiscal rule that referred to a maxed-out credit card and I will tell you the difference was less than skin deep.
I don't blame the people of Hartlepool for not voting Labour. I am profoundly sorry that they voted for a party that I think is taking us towards fascism. I see no solution in that. But nor did they see a solution in Labour. And I share that with them. There is no solution in Labour right now.
The question is, where does the Left go now?
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:
Spot on as so often Richard.
Labour have had a year to create something-anything and they have floated aimlessly.
Labour have had a year to destroy Conservative corruption, misfeasance, dishonesty and worse and they have floated aimlessly. The Conservative government should be getting publicly roasted on a daily basis by enraged members of the opposition.
Labour are an obstinate, anachronistic relic from another century.
Labour seem happy to allow the Conservative party free reign.
Labour present as fixedly unwilling to change and allow progressive politics, People’s QE, the Green New Deal or PR in to their world view.
This country needs better choices.
The answer to me lies in the turn out.
And that too is about what is on offer. Or what is not on offer.
That’s the message that Labour needs to think about.
One thing I do not agree with however is this supposed ‘identity politics’ phenomenon in the Labour party. The Labour party – formed from progressive liberals and workers – has always been into identity politics since it raised the issues of working people and the poor and pushed them into the political realm and based policy on meeting their needs (or did). Identity politics is used by all politicians. It’s just a lazy label (sorry) to use against Labour when there are far more obvious and deeper issues with its current state and I’m not comfortable with it.
And that’s the problem: look at what Labour did do and compare it to what it does now.
Labour has never really recovered from the 1970’s in my view. And that has enabled the Tory party to get in in Hartlepool yesterday – a party that hurts people.
Those who know that have not been given an incentive to vote.
I disagree with you on the identity politics PSR.
The shoutiness of the Labour Left and its obsession with issues that are at the fringe of most people’s lives is a massive turn off for 4/5 of the population.
And it makes it far too easy for our rancid right-wing media to caricature the whole party as self-indulgent and irrelevant.
And as a result important issues like climate change get bunged in with all the other fringe stuff.
Great post Richard, agree with all of it.
[…] have suggested that Labour needs a narrative. It does. Let me offer one to Labour, the Greens, the SNP, Plaid and anyone who wants to use it, […]
I know it is wearing thin now for some of us, but I think the most fundamental change that Labour has to agree upon is constitutional. They have to get over the belief that we still live in a two party system and that FPTP is an electoral system that offers choice. It clearly no longer does. Labour will continue to struggle under FPTP for the following reasons.
1) The Tories have perfected the art of appealing to a large enough soft English nationalist vote which is all they need. The Tories appeal to all of the English insecurities out there. They have perfected blame culture politics. This has resulted in a Government that lies, breaks deals, cannot be trusted by our traditional allies, is openly corrupt and yet gets away with it all. The British media largely sucks up to them, either because they are happy to support them or they fear offending them. The Tories have the system sown up, an elected dictatorship has been achieved.
2) Under FPTP Labour is no longer able to be radical. The only Lab Govt since 1979 has essentially been Tory lite, keeping the seat of power warm for when the English nationalists get back in. Left wing socialism is essentially dead in England, which is where Labour need to win. A form of right wing national socialism is very much alive in England.
3) Labour is dead in Scotland. The SNP stole Labours socialist clothes and also offers independence and freedom from English Tory rule. What’s not to like? Labour has always traditionally relied upon winning Scottish seats to get a FPTP majority. That has now gone, I would suggest for good.
4) Only under PR would Labour be free to offer a genuine radical alternative where every vote would count. The public would then be given a genuine choice between progressive and regressive parties. We should also have mandatory voting (with a none of the above option) and the voting age lowered to 16.
Until the above is recognized Labour will continue to struggle, either watering down what it has to offer or offering nothing for fear of offending certain voters in key FPTP seats. I fear that Labour will not do the right thing and will continue to support the indefensible. Labour is part of the reason why we now have a Tory elected dictatorship.
Agreed
But without a vision that cannot be delivered
I agree with that too.
The Labour party was formed out of a group of people who were like minded (not exactly the same) but who knew that working together in common interest was the key . It has forgotten its own history, and the reason why it has done so is because it become more Right wing.
It’s typically Right wing to forget factual history – the writer Timothy Snyder tells us this (read his ‘The Road to Unfreedom’) and I think he is correct.
Labour should by virtue of its own history (which it seems to have forgotten) reach out to other parties in opposition tot he Tories and form strategic alliances.
And again, Labour’s real history harpoons the idea that it is somehow bedevilled by identity politics. Labour IS identity politics and so are the Tories (theirs just happens to be more wealthy and wanna-be wealthy).
The phenomenon of identity politics is a false one in my view: identity politics as an idea is based on the precept that everything is in short supply (there is not enough money to help everyone) and you are expected to compete with other interests to get your share from a shrinking pool (by competing, you make the allocation of resources more ‘efficient’ in Neo-liberal eyes).
Moaning about identity politics is just a strategy for those who believe that they are not getting their fair share (racists and BREXIT supporters) or one used by the Tories and Blue Labour numpties to make people believe that this is the case. And so, further internecine fighting takes place within the Labour party so that effective opposition on behalf of many of us who know that the Tories are the biggest bunch of crooks in British politics for all time(?) don’t have a voice.
Remember: this is the age of Agnotology. It is this that bedevils the Labour party – not identity politics – which is just a symptom.
Sadly, I agree with all that, Richard. A brief but graphic illustration of your critique was on Channel 4 News last week when Cathy Newman asked Starmer if he were in government would he do here what Biden’s done with his Covid Relief Bill in the US. Instead of simply loudly saying, ‘YES’, and then giving a concise supporting explanation he launched into a long waffle about this, that and the other, which even as someone interested in politics, made little sense to me. So we had no idea whether it was a yes or not (which it should have been, of course).
With the vaccine bounce in full swing and the unlocking bounce still to fully kick in – and it’ll become turbo-charged after 21st June if all goes according to Johnson’s plan – it seems to me that this government can do whatever it likes for the rest of this year, at the least. Indeed, I suspect even a further surge in Covid will not make much impact unless it’s really bad. So, any opposition party – even an effective one – would have a tough time through the rest of 2021. On the basis of what we’ve seen so far (and I see from Private Eye that Mandelson is back as an adviser!!!), where that leaves Labour, and what they do over that period is anyone’s guess, however.
Wholly agree re Starmer
The inability to give a straight answer, or even ask a good question is crippling
And he does not ask good questions. He always asks cryptic ones.
The Labour right sabotaged Corbyn’s leadership. They are now back in control of the party having played their part in preventing a Labour government led by Corbyn.
Their “vision” if you can call it that is to gain power through appeasement of the powerful establishment entities* that support the Conservaives and have kept them in power for almost 90 of the last 120+ years (since Labour was formed.) That can only happen if they can convince the establishment that they will not threaten their power and wealth. It’s how Blair did it and is the reason Thatcher called him her “greatest achievement.”
The establishment want two right wing parties taking turns to manage the economy for their benefit while giving the appearance of democracy and choice where it doesn’t exist. This is the American system and it is where we are heading.
Perhaps Corbyn and McDonnell didn’t get everything right but they would certainly have brought a welcome and uch needed change to UK politics but that opportunity has now passed and I don’t think it will recur for a very long time, if ever.
—
*The media, amongst other things.
Corbyn and McDonnell failed
Get over it
The required vision is both radical and inclusive
They were unable to make it inclusive and people realised that
And the economics did not stack
Corbyn has been accused of many things but not many people would claim he wasn’t radical or inclusive. In any case, it wasn’t lack of radicalism and inclusivity that cost Labour the last election, and it wasn’t that their economic policy didn’t stack up either. When have the Conservatives’ economic policies ever stacked up?
No, the reasons Labour lost were:
-A massive smear campaign in the billionaire press
-Brexit: immediately after the vote Corbyn said “we must respect the result of the referendum” as is often the case, his political instincts were 100% right.
-Sabotage by the right wing of the party: primarily the Parliamentary party and the NEC.
I do not agree
There were conflicting narratives
The rest is irerelavnce
And for as long as you blame the PLP you are part of the problem and not part of the solution
Stop being petty and think big
Hi Richard,
I have the greatest of respect for you and have found your website enormously useful and interesting. I have learned a lot from your articles on the economy, public finances and many other things and often reference your work in posts on other websites.
I realise that we have different political opinions and I do not have a problem with that but I think it’s important to allow the debate to take place. With that in mind, I hope you will post my previous message on this thread.
Many thanks and keep up the good work.
kaboios
I have posted it
But I think you miss the point
Stop playing Labour poolitucs
Start doing politics
It’s wishful thinking to suppose that those who played a key role in undermining Labour’s chances at the last election will somehow be able to rally the party to support them for the next.
Never mind the fact that they don’t have a clue about what they stand for, as you correctly state in the article.
In addition, the facts are not irrelevant and it’s not pettiness to address them. It is necessary.
I admit this is all just proof as to why Labour is not the answer to anything right now
(This one doesn’t seem to have made it onto the site. Perhaps it didn’t arrive so will try again. Apologies if it’s a duplicate.)
It’s wishful thinking to suppose that those who played a key role in undermining Labour’s chances at the last election will somehow be able to rally the party to support them for the next.
Never mind the fact that they don’t have a clue about what they stand for, as you correctly state in the article.
The facts are not irrelevant and it’s not pettiness to address them. It is necessary.
I have a life
I moderate all comments
Give me a chance
It is not the lack of narrative that’s damaging labour,(although it could do with one) but the inability, or unwillingness, to look at alternatives. The most prominent one of these could allow Labour to be in power nearly indefinitely: a fair voting system. Governments of the UK since WW2, with one exception, have been minority governments relative to the popular vote. Should each vote not count properly. I wish mine would
England is now, effectively a one-party state; run by Boris Johnson and the ERG. What case is left for the Union among Scottish Labour voters, or even Scottish Liberal Democrats?
None.
Yes – it’s true.
Even the some English want to move to Scotland.
Discussed this afternoon…
There’s no point voting for Starmer’s Labour when there’s already a Tory party. Labour needs to go left again, hard left, to get its identity back. I’m aware this would alienate a vocal minority but the crowds who came out for Corbyn would probably re-emerge.
But they did not win votes
Left and right is history
So is centrism to be clear
The answer is green
I agree – the answer is green.
Caroline Lucas made the point a few nights ago – if you want green, vote Green. It encapsulates the message, has clarity and simplicity.
I personally have never warmed to Labour – but my do I want an opposition that can be salt and light.
Where I could I voted Green in this election
Well, as I write, with about half the results in. the Greens have picked up 60 councillors, up 40 on the 20 they had in these seats before. Not quite the 190 they added in 2019.
But Labour are down 170 and the Conservatives are up 160. The Conservatives are doing better than in 2016, but not as well as in 2017. Both still have thousands of council seats, compared to the few hundreds the Greens have.
The UK Greens are nowhere near the threshold of national government, as their colleagues are in Germany.
The climate emergency means the world hasn’t got time to wait for the UK Green Party to be able to play a decisive role in government.
Then Labou had better go very green very quickly and there is no sign of that
Bill
The only times when Labour has been remotely “hard left” since the 70’s were under Foot and Corbyn. They were wiped out under Foot and while Corbyn did reasonably well in one election it still was nowhere near good enough to topple May, one of the worst campaigning leaders the Tories ever put up. A hard left Labour Party in the FPTP system would be a godsend to the Tory press. They would wipe the floor with you.
You have to go back to Atlee in 1945 to see a genuine Labour radical alternative and even then it was based on the principles of the Liberal’s Keynes and Beveridge. I’m sorry but “hard left” has no chance. There is no evidence whatsoever that enough people would vote for it, certainly not in England and Scotland is history for Labour. Hard right in England maybe, but we more or less have that now with the Tories and the ERG.
Bill Kruse
You are right, but will it ever happen? Corbyn was elected leader because the right thought they had the game sewn up. They sponsored a candidate from the left as a sop, expecting him to lose.
They won’t hurry to do that again.
My understanding was that Hartlepool was held under Corbyn. Correct?
But Corbyn and McDonnell were by no means ‘hard left’. Even Miliband was portrayed as hard left.
I’m sorry but it’s bollocks. Corbyn and Miliband were both neo-liberal in my view. The ‘hard left’ was a label stuck on both leaders by the Tory friendly MSM and lapped up (this happens in the U.S. too).
And again look at the turn out for goodness sake.
And why did Starmer put a Remain supporter in an area that voted Leave? I mean, that is so stupid. Starmer should be dismissed for that alone.
For me its all about courageousness. The best comment so far is the one that mentions Clement Attlee who had the minerals to go big in the post war era. According the John Bew, Attlee didn’t really understand economics, but he did WHAT WAS RIGHT for the country, using the power that was available to Government. This Tory Government has been spending money (only because it has had to, and not enough I know and also spending it with menaces ). But it’s been spending it nonetheless.
Spending money is ‘in’.
The cat is out the bag but is it only me that thinks it’s only Labour who want to put it back in!!! They have not capitalised on this at all with any vision.
Ladies and Gentlemen I give you Keir Starmer’s Labour party:
Hopeless. Gutless. Barren. Dumb. Vacuous. Craven. Irrelevant.
I sense your frustration
This incompetent, corrupt, nasty, lying (so-called) government has done what it has done in the last 18 months (and, indeed, further if we go back to 2010) and, if I read it correctly, has become just the second government to gain a seat in a by-election in 40 years.
They must be rubbing their hands in glee and thinking ‘they are still voting for us. What else can we get away with and still get their vote’.
There needs to be something that must emerge – not a political party because that is the very essence of identity politicians – that not only gives people hope but tangibly demonstrates what can be done, what will be the benefits and what will be requited to achieve that.
Craig
So the attack against grassroots local membership and their CHOICE continues.
Starmer’s main focus is still against that largest political party membership in Europe. Hence the actions of the NEC and the narratives played out.
They will be happy that the Red Wall’s pieces are further kicked apart.
Will Starmer offer to stand down?
Will the membership at the local level ever be allowed to pick their own candidates?
Will they ever have a Recall System for sell out MP’s?
Blair’s years were marked by an ever more despondent electorate and lost millions of voters every time – I say that to these with rose tinted hindsight.
For me – this was perhaps the first election in 40 years that I did not go and vote in.
I expect many will have done the same as me.
The auto Labour voters – and the new members – stayed at home.
There cannot be any successful vision unless it is based on grassroots and that is what is fermenting unreported – the low turnout will be the first visible sign of that.
DunGroanin,
You are right.
I abstained this time as well. I couldn’t bring myself to vote Labour while the group who worked to sabotage the leadership and prevent a Labour government in 2017 and 2019 control the party. For me, what they did was unforgivable and I will neversa vote Labour again while they are in charge.
Oh for gods sake!
It’s too late now, but you should always vote. Spoil your ballot if you can’t vote for someone. They all get counted.
A protest that is indistinguishable from apathy is no protest at all
Nonsense.
The left have sent a powerful message by not voting for Labour at this election.
I would never vote LibDem, they are failed Conservatives.
The Greens are politically inept. Yes, they’ve gained a few seats (probably benefiting from the damage the Labour right have inflicted on the party) but politically they are right wing appeasers and that’s a highway to nowhere.
Spoiled ballots are a waste of time IMO.
I think your time here is over
We debate politics here
You are debating pettiness
@kaboios
And what powerful message would that be?
That Tory rule is preferred to democratic participation?
A technicality, but it is the third time the governing party has won a byelection in the last 39 years. Angela Rumbold won Mitcham and Morden in June 1982. And if you take that as a precedent, Labour might be out of power for another 15 years.
But it is the second time in just over four years. Arguably Copeland in February 2017 was even worse: it had been in Labour hands since 1935; Jack Cunningham’s seat for 35 years to 2005.
The turnout in Hartlepool was 42%, down 15% from the 2019 general election. I suppose that is typical for a byelection that can’t make any kind of dent in the massive government majority, but a local independent Samantha Lee took 10% of the votes, almost 3,000.
Labour has a lot of work to do. Where is the vision thing?
Somehow Labour needs to dispel the cloud of cynicism that hangs over our politics and makes so many voters think “oh those politicians, they’re all the same , all in it for themselves”.
Despite their evident inadequacies, if Labour under Corbyn and McDonald had won in 2019, I think we would at least have had a government largely staffed by people generally more interested in doing good for the country as a whole than in their own personal power and wealth, enriching their cronies and generally reinforcing the establishment. And the pandemic would surely have opened McDonald’s eyes to the economic realities and possibilities and reduced (if not banished) his obsessive fear of not balancing the books. Also many of the policies in the 2019 Labour manifesto would have been good for the ordinary people of this country (although some much better and greener ones have appeared here in Richard’s blog).
Labour under Corbyn held the Hartlepool seat in 2017 and 2019, so the importance of the much-mentioned ‘restoring trust’ factor is debatable (and in any case I’m not sure that very publicly suspending or expelling droves of left-wingers from the party has really been the most effective way to achieve that). In 2019 ten million people in the UK still voted for Labour, despite a fatally confused Brexit policy and in the face of the dirtiest campaign that I can remember. So any arguments that either “it was all Corbyn’s fault” or “left-wing policies are never popular” are simply far too facile and simplistic.
I think voters come in two main categories:
a) those who vote mainly for the party they perceive will be best for the country as a whole, and
b) those who vote mainly in their own perceived self-interest.
The key word in either case is perceive(d); this perception is hugely influenced by the media that voters are exposed to, in other words propaganda, which consists mainly of the mainstream press (largely right wing of course), the main news TV news channels (mainly centre-right, except on some social issues) and (increasingly) social media. The main thing about propaganda is that it works, otherwise so much effort and money would not be invested in it. Until Labour comes to terms with this and devises and resources an appropriate strategy, they are unlikely ever again to gain power. The only alternative is to move so far to the right that the establishment decides it’s safe to “give them a turn”, as others have mentioned here, which is to a great extent what seems to have happened with Blair & Co in 1997 – a cheaper option no doubt, but there are always other, non-financial, costs to selling one’s soul.
OK Phil…………..you’re on. What about some other categories:
What about C: Voters who lap up on-line media crap and lies put out by high spending Tories because its commensurate with their own inner dialogue and use that to guide their voting?
What about D: Voters whose lives are so blighted their only pleasure in life is to see other people lose like they have (the ‘level-downers’)?
What about E: Voters who are completely turned off and are savvy enough to know that the the two parties are basically the same?
Labour needs to talk to these people fast.
But Oh look – Starmer has just sacked Angela Rayner. Bobby’s is back on the beat! Greeeaaattt!
So there we go then – sod those who don’t vote – we’ll just chase the swing voters like Blair did. Except that this time your swing voters are mostly fascists manufactured by the Tories.
What strategy? What sagacity?
Oh dear………………….
Phil, thank you for that analysis which I largely concur with based on my experience.
I would only add that the propaganda/narrative creation / nudge messaging also includes the MSM not allowing the OXYGEN OF PUBLICITY to these they have been instructed to destroy.
As has just so obviously been shown in the Scottish Elections and the new Alba party. As was made obvious with the amount of coverage Fartage garnered in all his incarnations and his very own talk radio prime time slot.
That is why the only way forward is from the grass roots – and that o am afraid means a whole new generation before any breakthrough will be possible.
However looking at the result in light of the turnout of 42% only 22% of the total electorate actually voted for the Tory – so how is that a great success?
Depressing results, but much as expected. Mainly the vaccine bounce, it seems, plus no clear or convincing alternative vision articulated by Labour.
The by now well-documented dishonesty, cronyism etc of Johnson and co seems to have had little traction with voters in many areas. The only result of it seems to have been to increase cynicism further, which the low turnout probably reflects.
The return of gunboat diplomacy that made all the headlines this week may also have given the Tory vote a further boost, particularly in strongly Brexit-supporting areas (and of course provided Johnson and co with another source of distraction).
“…..Blair and Brown actually ran government surpluses for a while – taking money out of the economy”
Wasn’t this because everyone else was borrowing like crazy at the time? So, according to the principles of the sectoral balances: If everyone else is net borrowing the government has to be running a surplus. It’s not necessarily that the Government sets out to do this in its taxation and spending plans. If the Labour Govt was at fault, it was in creating the conditions that led to too much private sector borrowing in the first place.
The problem is that nearly everyone thinks that if Govt revenues are high then it has more money to spend. It is actually the other way around. If revenues are high it is potentially a sign of an overheating economy and the Govt should consider either cutting back its spending and/or raising taxes. Alternatively if they are low it should do the opposite.
Another way to look at it is to say that Govt should do the opposite of what everyone else wants to do to maintain a sensible mid course between having too much inflation and too much recession. ie Keep the economy running at just the right ‘temperature’.
This was policy
They forced the borrowing
No, because the borrowing that the private sector was engaged in was lent from private sector banks.
This has got nothing to do with the budgetary position of the Treasury insofar as it does not determine the expenditure or revenue at any given time.
Put it this way: The government didn’t have to run a surplus because of private sector borrowing. It could have printed £500bn the next day and the net borrowing of the private sector would have remained the same.
@ Steve,
Everyone else, apart from government, isn’t just the private sector, or more correctly, the private domestic sector. If the Govt had spent an extra amount of money into the economy the net borrowing of everyone else would only have “remained the same” if they’d then borrowed the same extra amount. They wouldn’t necessarily have done so.
Richard is closer when he says “they forced the borrowing” except I would put it as encouraged, or allowed, rather than forced.
I fear those of us who were literally born in to Labour will just have to face it. The Party’s over. Its traditional voter base has fragmented with much of it defecting to the Tories. The fragments that remain appear fated to be incapable of forming common policy positions – or worse, to be in perpetual conflict. Voters will never vote in to government a party that demonstrates an inability to govern itself. And the Tories have stolen any of the useful clothes it had been trying on since the Blair/Brown years and it’s now butt-naked with nothing to say and nowhere to go.
This is taken from a football forum message board of my local team.. you might not like the content and I apologise for the language but it is representative a large band of x Labour voters
“ They should change there ways and not bleat on about Palestine, giving jabs to the rest of the world, fixated on the woke agenda, banging the LGBT and BLM drum. These issues the average man or woman jn the street dont give a fuck about. Its all about making sure we all have jobs and generations getting an improved standard of living. There target market is too small… metropolitan types and old school lefties. Fuck em, and starmer…..should never be trusted when you have a guy in charge who swept Saville and Rotherham under the carpet”
For those who suggest green is the answer – undoubtedly it is.
And there is actually a Labour council (and it is still post 6 May, Labour) that thinks so too:
http://www.progressivepulse.org/society/60-of-passive-houses-need-no-heating
Craig
Stuff like Palestine, LGB&T etc., will look like the most important things to the Labour party when it is saying and doing naff-all about everything else.
I sense that if they had to more to say on these issues, LGB&T , BLM issues wouldn’t matter to the electorate.
It’s the absence of any popular vision or politics from Labour that over emphasises and leads to the ‘woke’ accusation. But it is still an accusation that has come from the Right and adopted by disgruntled voters.
Having said that, I would never vote for the Tories in order to punish Labour. Green – yes. But Tory? No.
The Tories are still going to push through austerity. I still think there are other dynamics at play – that over half the voters did not vote in Hartlepool , and that BREXIT still casts a shadow,
Unfortunately the Hartlepool bye-election will strengthen Johnson’s position, despite him being the worst Prime Minister in memory (I don’t remember Eden). Not good for the country.
Starmer seems to be paralysed by Corbyn’s problem of not really being able to say what he stands for. Corbyn was able to produce some cliches about nationalisation, but Brexit formed 90% of politics between 2016 and 2019 and he was unable to say what the Labour position was at a point when we needed an effective Opposition like never before. Starmer seems similarly worried about saying anything definite at all in case he upsets some wing of the party, when actually he should be leading by spelling out a compelling alternative to the present government.
If you want to clutch at straws … Biden looked boring last year but now it looks as if he was under-promising in order to over-deliver. But Starmer hasn’t yet given me confidence he might deliver anything at all.
Agreed.
I don’t know who is advising Labour these days but if they are still working with Focus Groups and triangulating and all that nonsense like Blair did then its on a road to ‘Inevitability Politics’ (Tim Snyder).
Labour has learned too much about markets and forgotten about people. If I was the leader I would be finding out why people didn’t vote and thinking about turning them on to get them in the voting booth.
The book ‘Failures of State’ on Amazon (about the shortcomings of the Tory response to Covid) has nearly all 5 star reviews throughout (300 odd). And there’s Peter Oborne’s book too about Boris’ lying.
But look what happened.
So let’s not underestimate the lying and the cash behind the Tory win either.
As for Biden – in the end Trump offended too many people but also the underhand means by which he won in 2016 came out too.
In this country, our elite is much more cunning and subversive than any Trotskyist cell it accuses of existing. Our elite are past master of survival. And they are winning big this time – aided by this political blindness towards the dark side of wealth accumulation that even affects Labour.
I would hope this fine message is not dependent on Labour or any other form of nationalism.
Green seems currently, to be the only ‘political’ badge of human honesty, one that recognises the human is hubristic and has yet to overcome infantile desires. While I don’t see any real change in their approach they at least signal the possibility of the end of elitism which is the disease that is shared in the mainstream. The death of the mainstream will be painful and we will have to suffer [Johnson!] on that journey.
I would agree that Labour is no longer (if it ever was) the party of the common good but if not Labour which is the Common Good party. Not the Lib Dem’s – they to are difficult to pin down. The Greens? They do seem to want us all to survive but do they have strong enough policies elsewhere?
Yes, Penny, the Greens do have other policies. Lots of them, in fact, but all honed down and prioritised twice yearly at their party conferences. It could be called cumbersome, I suppose. Or it could be called inclusive and democratic.
https://policy.greenparty.org.uk/
Fully agree that the Hartlepool result exposes the depths to which Labour has sunk. Gives me no pleasure to say it, as a member who first joined four decades ago. To be in a position to serve the people, Labour has to embrace PR. There is a strong grassroots Labour campaign calling for that to be agreed at the party conference this year. A quarter of local Labour parties support it officially now. Let’s see whether the current ‘leadership’ can be convinced.
Everyone keeps taking it as fact that labour voters went in their droves and voted Tory, they did not, at least in Hartlepool.
Yes, labour lost 7k votes, but the BP lost 10k and the Tories only picked up 3k out of those 17k, with other picking up 2k.
I wonder, what proportion of the 3k were former labour voters rather than BP? Probably more of the other vote was previously labour than the 3k.
The main issue seems to have been that people just couldn’t be bothered to vote, unlike 2017 where labour got around 14k more votes than this week, 52% of the vote, before the second referendum with remain absolutely as an option pledge which saw the BP gain a huge vote which if they hadn’t stood would have led to a Tory win back then.
The analysis of the Hartlepool results by Richard North here
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=87966
is refreshingly different from most of the mainstream media:
I’ve just quoted what seem the most important bits from an article I suggest is well worth reading in full:
“the real culprit here is the turnout. From 1974, when 49,688 voters passed through the polling stations, representing 76.9 percent of the electorate, this had dropped to 41,835 voters in 2017, giving a turnout of 59.2 percent (and not very much different in 2019, when the turnout was 57.9 percent). But, in the by-election just past, turnout plummeted to 29,933, calling in at 42.7 percent. Between 2017 and 2021, nearly 12 thousand voters stayed at home.”
“Given that the Tory vote largely held up, even if it was significantly down on historic levels, it is reasonable to postulate that most of the stay-at-home voters were former Labour supporters. ”
“In essence, the Tory showing is actually quite mediocre, on which basis, rather than suggest that there had been a swing to the Tories, it would be more appropriate to point to that collapse of the Labour vote: the Tories didn’t win the seat in any real sense. Labour lost it.”
I think that is telling, and perceptive
About 15% of people who could vote actually did so fir the new MP, I think (but that’s a quick figure: double check before quoting)
As soon as I saw the turn out I suspected this and I agree.
Between 1945 and 2019 general election turnout has been in very significant decline. From 1945-2000 it was between 70% and circa 85% (exceptionally), but the best-fit regression line is sloping downwards. From the 21st century it is now between 60% and just under 70%. What does this reflect? Volumes could be written, but a well-merited loss of credibility in politicians and Parliament, an FPTP system and the centralising power of Party to choose candidates; who often could scarcley find their way to the constituency without a minder. Candidates no longer represent an area to which their own life is committed beyond an election result.
Nobody is interested. Those who do vote often appears to be limited to those who possess no standards at all; cronyism? Who cares? Lying? What’s new. Cheating? Doesn’t everyone? Those who care about such matters are driven to the margin, or do not vote. In the 21st century 30%-40% of electors do not vote. In Hetlepool over 57% of the electorate did not vote. There is the foundation of Conservative victory: a void.
Do not look at the political agenda for insight; you are being manipulated. Look at the facts. Examine the evidence. Find out what is really happening. It is not found by reading the media, or the political gloss.
Corbyn led Labour must have offered something in 2017 or else we wouldn’t have seen the largest political swing since Atlee after WW2. Labour had to bounce back from a pitiful vote share in the Late Blair, Brown and Miliband years, the result of vague centrism.
Whilst Corbyn’s policies were not as radical as some of us would like, it was enough to put clear blue water between them and the Conservatives. This allowed electors to understood what they were voting for, (nationalisation, redistribution, disarmament) in contrast to the confusing, centrist image of Starmer’s party today. Ironically, as Richard mentioned, some of Corbyn’s policies, whilst ridiculed at the time, have since been visited and even implemented by this Conservative government, if only as a necessity in time of crisis. In a limited sense, we could even claim a few of those Socialist ideas were successful.
These policies were so popular, it made the economic elites uneasy. However, Corbyn’s opposition to colonialism and aggressive war terrified the political elites and security services, since it threatened Britain’s geo-political position and US relations. After unsuccessfully attempting to undermine his reputation in a variety of unsuccessful slurs, they finally settled on turning his support for Palestinian oppression into a narrative of one which involved supporting ‘terrorists’ and in particular, despite his impeccable anti-racist credentials, ‘antisemitism’! This nonsense, required the complicity of ‘credible’ mainstream media, who might just be believed by his more naïve followers. This was the ‘identity politics’ card which weakened him and some of his support.
However, the coup de grace for Corbyn came in 2019 due to the political infighting over Brexit. This partly resulted in a breakaway party which drained support, eventually to the Lib-Dems. The Labour membership & Unions had settled on a horrible, complex, compromise; a ‘Brexit centrist’ solution which also required more renegotiating. As with all centrist policies, it was confusing, and by far the least popular amongst the wider electorate who were tired of Brexit and yearned for an end to it all. It was also unpopular with 2017 Labour voters, for which the desire to Remain in the EU, had grown from 65% to 80% since the referendum, as the referendum lies was exposed. Anything other than supporting a Remain policy would be a disaster; and so it proved. Some 2017 voters stayed away or turned to the Greens & Lib-Dems. This was in complete contrast to the simple Tory mantra of ‘Get Brexit done.’
Technically therefore, Corbyn’s team was hopeless, as they also proved in their failure to defend their marginal seats. However, their vision of a Socialist future was admirable, and they almost pulled it off 2 years earlier.
Corbyn failed the way Starmer is
No one believed him on Brexit – a massive issue
They don’t believe Starmer either
And fail at that level and no one belueves you at all
So, game over
Given that we are currently mid-term in the election cycle. What should Labour glean (if anything) from the fact that Biden kept the full extent of his radical policies very close to his chest until after he was elected.
I despair…..
This is something I have always advocated but with mixed feelings.
The Tories do this sort of thing all of the time. Labour has to play the same game – however it can’t because how does it reach out to those who are Labour voters but don’t vote because they want something more authentic Labour-wise? Like me.
But Biden won because his party had already undergone a split of sorts when it chose Clinton over Saunders in 2016 – Saunders was essentially the President elect for 2016 and Clinton’s nomination came about because of senior Democrats over ruling the regional Saunders nominations.
I think that Trump was so disgusting but threatening that the Democrats had to work together and mobilise Democrat voters – I suspect that Saunders has had a backroom effect on Biden as part of a deal (remember that Saunders has always had a socialist label – not one that is very popular in the States). Saunders could well be a back seat driver at the moment in the Democratic party.
Contrast that with the still divided, navel staring Labour Party. Labour could never work together like this and lo and behold they’ve just proven it – they’ve just gone and sacked a prominent Left winger. And Peter ‘Mangler’ is back advising Starmer it seems so its back to swing voters. But this is not 1997. This is austerity/Covid/BREXIT/independence addled Britain. The rules have changed. This is a land transformed by the Tories who have been more radical than even Thatcher dreamed of; a people divided between those who led by Tory thinking and vote contrasting with a group who just don’t like what they see.
But the real answer lies in the none-voters for Labour – I’m convinced that a ‘courageous’ bid for power would get those disgruntled Labour voters back, as well as those who are uncomfortable with Tory sleaze and lies.
Don’t panic. Labour lost Hartlepool but the strong showing for the Brexit Party there in 2019 suggested that was always on the cards. They won Wales and won most of the metro mayors. They lost some councillors in England, but not as bad as 2017 and there are still thousands of Labour councillors in office across the country.
The main – the only – question is, how do they avoid losing a fifth general election in a row? You can’t implement any of your policies if you are in opposition. Is Starmer more in the mould of Kinnock or Smith or Brown than Blair? The inevitable internecine warfare between left and right will get Labour nowhere. They need to unite and fight behind a coherent message, and in particular need to get out the vote next time. They need to learn that splitting the progressive vote lets the Conservatives in, and cooperate with other parties. If it can’t do any of that, they are spent for another decade.
Agreed wholeheartedly.
I too agree with this analysis. A turnout of 43%, a slight increase in the numbers voting Tory and a massive decrease in those voting Labour is hardly a sign of support for the Tories. Rather a massive drop in Labour support and ‘a plague on all your houses attitude’.
And the only way to beat this, and to stop the formation of a one party state in the UK (or what is left of it) is a progressive alliance between all left wing and non Tory parties, such as that advocated by Compass, which I’ve just joined and shall now be making regular contributions to.
sickoftaxdodgers – I wonder if Labour have been carrying out an under the radar trial in Cambridgeshire
“At the county council, the Tories had a net loss of eight seats, the Lib Dems gained five and Labour gained two.
Labour did not field candidates in six south Cambridgeshire seats, five of which had been won by the Conservatives in 2017.
The Liberal Democrats won all of those seats when the results were announced on Friday afternoon.
BBC East political correspondent Ben Schofield reported the local leaders of both Labour and the Liberal Democrats said it was not an organised pact.
Labour suggested it was a result of the pandemic making organising candidates tougher in that part of the county.
Labour leader Elisa Meschini said she was “extremely pleased” and “excited” that the authority would now be under no overall control, after four years of Conservative rule.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-57021556
Mandelson and others are urging Labour to tack sharply to the right and abandon the policies that Starmer inherited and promised to continue with. That would be (deliberately of course) to misinterpret the lessons of 2019.
And I don’t give any credence to the spate of triumphalist advice to Labour coming from right-wing hacks, (including in the Guardian). For them 2019 and now 2021 represent “mission accomplished”.
Memories are short; a poll taken just before the 2019 election indicated that Labour’s policies (“hard left”? hmm, actually pretty moderate social-democratic, if you ask me) were popular with voters — but that wasn’t the big issue!
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/11/12/labour-economic-policies-are-popular-so-why-arent-
A glimmer of hope for me: in some areas the local council elections showed a notable success for Labour, for example the “Salford model”:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/05/why-socialist-salford-bucked-the-trend
(highly recommended reading )
and something similar in Preston:
https://www.preston.gov.uk/article/1339/What-is-Preston-Model-
So maybe Labour has to rebuild from the ground up?
Overall the council elections in England rather surprisingly show a swing to Labour
The media will not be noting this
Nor will they be mentioning the many seats won by the Greens across the UK, who have overtaken the LibDems in the London elections this week to become the third most popular party after Labour and the Conservatives. Worthing in Sussex had no Labour councillors till 2017; now there are 15.
“The simple fact is that if the people of Hartlepool think that the Tories – who so very obviously do not act in their best interests – have a better narrative for government than Labour do then Labour has got something very deeply wrong.”
We can say the same about the Lib Dems. I have voted for them in the past. It was admittedly a tactical vote, but I didn’t like the Blairite government. I’d find it difficult to vote for them again though.
I’d like to see a return to a guarantee of full employment and the necessary macroeconomic policies to create the conditions for that. The State would guarantee a job for anyone who needs one. Everything else would naturally follow.
But we don’t have anyone pursuing that line at the moment. The centre ground seem fixated on the concept of a UBI which doesn’t fit with the traditional demand of the working class for decent jobs at a living wage. If the robots do ever take our jobs, which is unlikely, then it makes more sense to reduce hours across the board rather than accept high levels of unemployment for some and 40+ hours pw as usual for most.