This poll was suggested by Kirtsy in a comment here yesterday and seemed to be popular as a question needing an answer.
So, here it is:
Should left-leaning politicians and powerful figures begin a new party to pressure Starmer’s Labour in the way UKIP pressured and changed the Tories?
- Yes (75%, 2,332 Votes)
- No (15%, 461 Votes)
- Wait and see (5%, 169 Votes)
- I'm abstaining, but show me the results anyway (5%, 158 Votes)
Total Voters: 3,120
For what it is worth, I think so, but that care will be required. Any such party has to be seen to be capable of having its own opinion, and not be controlled by any one interest if it is to attract wide support.
I should add a caveat as well: I doubt I will ever engage in party politics. But I could act as an adviser, as I am to others already.
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:
‘Act as an advisor’? Controlling behind the scenes without mandate or scrutiny, you mean?
Who are you ‘advising’ at the moment? Surely you wouldn’t need to keep begging for funding if you actually had a role as an advisor?
You were rejected by the most left-wing party (Corbyn’s Labour) previously – who else is going to want your ‘advice’ ?
If a non-racist politician asks me for advice I provide it.
There are current politicians who do so.
I am never paid for doing so.
For the record, over time I have advised Tory, Labour, SNP, LibDem, Green, Sinn Fein and Plaid members of various parliaments.
Do you have a problem with elected politicians seeking advice from those who have opinion to offer? Why?
In fairness Richard, You do seem to have a problem with ‘people offering advice to politicians behind the scenes’ when you don’t agree with that advice and/or those politicians aren’t from your favoured political stance.
Need you frequently comment about ‘vested interests’ etc, so you could at least try and be a bit consistent.
Of course I have problems with people offering advice I don’t agree with: it’s wrong, in my opinion. Do you expect me to welcome it?
That doesn’t mean I have a problem with advice being offered.
I am being completely consistent. And your comment makes no sense, to be polite.
“Controlling behind the scenes without mandate or scrutiny” LMAO…
You do realise Richard isn’t Dominic Cummings, right?
It’d be nice if a truly Left organisation could be formed to pressure Labour alá UKIP vs Tories, but to be able to do that they’ll need money to promote their ideas… And therein lies the rub with all Left groups, where does the money come from?
For UKIP it was Arron Banks, for this new Left group are there any multi-millionaires of the Left that have that sort of money sloshing around?
Maybe Union backing is a possibility, hopefully thew money the Labour would normally get, but Unions these days seem to be full of ‘middle of the roaders’…
I’d happily get onboard if something does arise from the dire state Labour currently is…
I can live with the middle of the readers if tey are left of centre
We don’t need a far-left party
We need a genuinely left of centre one now that Labour is centre-right
Who get’s to define, what’s far left, Corbyn in 2017-2019 offered what would be considered middle of the road social democracy in most of Europe but with out idiotic media/politics he’s declared extreme/far left.
If we allow others to define the boundaries of what is and is not acceptable then what’s the point? Because thats what Starmers already doing bowing before the media/establishment telling them he won’t do anything to offend them. They need offending, the current system just isn’t working for millions of us.
Let’s be clear – his views on Ukraine show him out of line with even John McDonnell
Many/most of the commentators use the term “left wing” or left something. Convenient for categorisation by the feral media. Let’s try this:
Clean rivers (not flowing with sewage)
NHS Dentists that are avaiable (as opposed to dental deserts)
Ambulances that arrive before you are dead
A&E that does not leave you waiting for hours and hours (days & days?)
NHS staffing levels that do not lead to staff feeling like zombies @ end of shift
An education system fit for purpose (= education) & teachers remunerated to reflect this.
Affordable energy
Warm comfortable housing.
Left wing? Really?
There is also an undecurrent of “not now, let’s give Liebore a chance (thus continuing the one-party, two whinges state, “now it’s my turn” style of). 43 years and counting, the experiment continues, first one, then the other and the observers still expect a different outcome – I’m sure Einstein said something about this.
There are two aspects that any new party needs to address: policy & personal. The list above could be classed as bare-bones policy/”missions” (hmm that seems familiar). The personal relates to the large number of ambient gargoyles sitting in the HoP. Many(most?) of them are vile creatures, but still “enjoy” media support. Thus any new party will need to address this – by going personal &, possibly being unfair (do not forget, the media did not “play fair” with Corbyn). I can think of quite a few memes that would play well with locals in quite a lot of tory seats (and perhaps a few Liebore seats).
If any of the above gets juices flowing, I’ll talking to a party – be interested to hear from those that might like to “come along for a ride” – wouldn’t it be nice to have some fun at the expense of our erected politicians (who the media puts on pedestals for the purpose of knocking them down – Handcock etc.).
& for the avoidance of doubt – I have zero interest in being an elected politician. I’d be a bad one & there are far too many of them.
Not sure of the best timings though, b4 general election may undermine chances of Labour ousting the tories?
That is why I have the wait and see option
I’ve been thinking this for quite a few months now (since Labours poll lead started to look insurmountable). What would happen if Jeremy Corbyn started a new political party which was more or less heavily focused on a single issue that voters on the left all cared deeply about. A party led by Corbyn that’s entire focus was on saving the NHS for example, with a host of policy ideas around the economy and taxation that would make that achievable, would surely garner enough support to make Starmer take notice.
I have to say that Carbyn would really not be the person to lead such a party
He has had his day and was really not that good. Sorry, but let’s be honest about that
I’m not sure any truly left-wing leader would have faired any better in the Labour Party of 2015-2020, but we can disagree on that and yet still agree that he pushed the Overton window significantly to the left, inflicted many parliamentary defeats on a Tory government on whom he imposed a plurality, and showed the Labour party, and politics generally, to be thoroughly corrupt. That’s quite an achievement.
I do agree he’s not the man to lead a new party, though.
Fared.
I agree that Corbyn wasn’t great, but that’s not the point. Farage wasn’t great either. But he could say no wrong in the eyes of about 10% of people who cast a vote and that was all it took to pressure and change the Tories.
I am a Green Party member so obviously my comments will be subject to the self imposed disciplines of Party membership but clearly there is also the possibility of creating a ‘Coalition’ including existing organisations to serve the same function?
I can’t reopen the poll once it has started
That would be unfair
But I get your point
My personal experience has been that Labour dislike the Greens and often actively work against them. Locally the Lib Dems and Greens are working quite effectively together, but in effect are holding Labour to account. There are a few exceptions like Clive Lewis, but I can’t see much hope for collaborative working let alone a coalition.
Labour is intensely tribal and that is one of its great weaknesses
The Green Party already exists and has been showing up Labour’s failings at local level for many years. Labour hates the Greens because they are good at the community serving politics that Labour was once known for. You will see Greens on picket lines actively supporting the current public sector strikes and vocally exposing Brexit for the lies it always was. And of course Labour now has to pretend to have a green agenda because of pressure from the Greens. It is our two party FPTP system that allows both main parties to drift rightwards and be effectively hijacked. PR, not a new party has to be the solution to our current situation that means the vast majority of us feel completely disenfranchised and asked to vote for the least worst option despite it not being what we want.
There are lots of Labour members, even MPs, on picket lines. It’s only the front bench that can’t do it. Not all Labour MPs have forgotten their roots.
Although no longer allowed to be a labour MP in name, Corbyn is an MP and Labour party member who is often on picket lines.
Yep, join or vote Green party. They’re already established, have a manifesto broadly in line with labours in 2017 / 2019, have an open and democratic constitution, and imo are the best hope to get socialist policies on the political agenda
The green party is having its spring conference next weekend.
Unfortunately one of the motions is for HS2, which is in my mind as much of a betrayal as Starmer is doing to the labour party, except his in on a bigger scale.
They are saying that as HS2 is partly done, then we may as well let them finish it. So much for green party principles.
The majority of UK voters have consistently voted centre left; but, FPTP has enabled the Tories to regularly return the largest number of MPs. Without PR splitting the centre left into smaller groupings only assists the Tories.
Timing is important. Ideally labour would need to win the next election just to get the conservatives out of power and then a new party should emerge to hold them to account. Splitting the Labour vote now and letting the Conservatives hold on to power is a frightening thought.
That is why I added the wait and see option
I came to much the same conclusion. My heart answers ‘Yes’ but my head says ‘No, not right now’. The Tories win so often against a split opposition vote that now doesn’t seem the time to introduce another choice for voters. Realistically there isn’t time before the next general election for a new party to establish itself, build credibility and displace labour, but it would manage to further split the opposition vote (unless it placed candidates very selectively, a bit like Farage in 2019).
If we don’t remove the Tories from government at the next opportunity then heaven help us all (well, nearly all), and would they ever allow us another opportunity? So, reluctantly, I see Starmer’s Labour as the only realistic ‘Anyone But The Tories’ option. I’d love to see them co-operate electorally with other parties but that doesn’t look likely. So get Starmer into power, and let him have a brief window to show his true colours in government. Then would be the time for a new party to critique his agenda, offer a more progressive option and put pressure on his continuing to hold power.
Jeremy Corbyn increased Labour’s share of the vote by more than any other of the party’s election leaders since 1945. Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-election-result-vote-share-increased-1945-clement-attlee-a7781706.html
But Starmer said that the door is open for them to leave ( https://bit.ly/3ZHCyKg ), despite him claiming that people often feel invisible in their own country ( https://bit.ly/3mqo17t )
I know of no other politician who is deliberately non-inclusive and seeks to make so many people invisible. But I hope that the left does not sabotage the Labour right, like Labour and the establishment did to Corbyn (see https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/killing-jeremy-corbyn ). Here Mick Lynch is the better politician https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQPlX195em4&t=253s
Jeremy had his merits
And weaknesses
He also has no hope of pulling enough people together now
That is my point
Yes, to use a phrase I learnt from you a few months ago, the Overton window has probably closed for Corbyn. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
(Is it in the glossary!)
Not yet
I voted yes.
I want a political party to welcome all the left wing people Labour will not represent. I want it to organise and pressure Labour but not to stand against labour in seats it needs to win. A labour government led by Starmer will be a huge disappointment BUT another Tory kleptocracy will be a disaster for democracy. So I say form the party. I’d want Corbyn to lead the way by standing in Islington BUT I don’t want to split the vote in marginals. Corbyn would win with a slightly reduced majority as a few diehard Labour voters would follow the Starmer line [lie?].
As the Tory Party has moved further and further towards the authoritarian, populist right and Labour moves into the vacated centre right space there is lots of room for a centre left party. However, the party will still have to operate in a broken and loaded system, which it will have little chance of gaining any traction in. I often wonder if there will ever be a right time for a party that campaigns, not on left/right isues but on democratising our electoral system and politics…. and that does mean legally accountable politicians, proportional representaion, taking the money out of politics, media ownership controls and the abolition (or reform) of the House of Lords.
UKIP operated in this system and effected things with very few MPs.
The time to do this has passed. A year ago support for a left leaning party would have perhaps acted as a brake on the more neoliberal leanings of KS and RR. Now they feel emboldened by Tory implosion. After an election it will be viewed as sour grapes and they have 5 who cares what the left say years. The only chink of light is voter apathy giving Labour a smaller majority and therefore needing to listen to the left. But that seems unlikely.Perhaps Union militancy will make them sit up
60% of people in this country want a left of centre alternative
Actual voting preferences suggest otherwise.
But FPTP rigs that
An extra party in an FPTP system just means the Tories get in with fewer votes? Not sure how that helps. As I’ve said on Twitter many times, if UK Labour, the LibDems and the Green Party would just sit down together and talk about what they AGREE on, there is at least two if not three parliamentary terms worth of work there. But of course they are all too self interested, rather than interested in the best course for the country.
The lesson from UKIP should be learned. It has dragged the Tories far to the extreme right (and brought us Brexit). While superficially attractive, the danger is that a similar thing may happen with Labour in the face of a far left party.
Far left?
I only want social democracy
This is not a direct correlation but it may be useful for people to be aware of recent developments in Ireland. The Irish Labour Party had frequently been in coalition governments (with both centre-right larger parties) but many people believed that they repeatedly failed to deliver on its own centre-left policies. In 2015, two independent members of parliament (both ex-Labour party members) formed the Social Democrats. In the 2020 general election, the new party won 6 seats (out of 160). Current Polling was regularly 3-4%, but growing. Labour was falling to similar levels. Last week, the two Co-leaders stood down and a new leader was appointed, Holly Cairns. Aged 33, she is seen as representing the locked-out generation of young people who are worse-off than their parents. Support for the SocDems has jumped to 9%, including 16% of those in their 20’s. There is every possibility that the SocDems in Ireland can grow further to attract more Centre-left support from those who up to now, believed that Sinn Fein was the only realistic alternative to the existing centre-right parties of government.
In this week’s poll, the Labour Party slipped to 3%.
Declaration of interest: I am a SocDem local Councillor, elected in 2019.
Thanks
The joys of FPTP
Rather than dive straight into a new political party with all the debate on membership, policy, candidates etc we need and could form a united front on the same lines as Enough is Enough with a limited programme around which much of the non revolutionary and some of the revolutionatry left could unite such as campaigning for cuts in energy prices, more council houses, oppose the fascists and racism, support picket lines, campaign on global warming and union rights. Unlike EisE it should be democratic and more than just a platform for a few leaders with local branches We already have the skeleton with Peoples Assemblies. A new party could evolve out of that through the practical experience of actually working together and forming limited policies we can all unite around. Lets get a base people on the streets and in the workplaces before we consider candidate in elections
I’ve voted new party because Starmer Labour is a lost cause and I’m disenfranchised. Why not ask the likes of Gary Stevenson to fund it?
Plus, Richard may not like Corbyn but he did make Labour solvent. (And vibrant and relevant.) Many are there waiting in the Peace & Justice Project who’d gladly pay subs to a party that represented them so I think you’d need Corbyn on board if not as leader. He must be sick of all the flak and smears by now anyway.
The Peace and Justice Project has more members than Plaid Cymru.
I agree Corbyn’s time has passed, even if he was never going to be allowed to govern even if he’d defeated May in 2017. The rest of the PLP and SCG are a busted flush. Starmer appears to be exceeding even my worst fears. To all intents and purposes, he’s behaving like an establishment place man, safe to install until the public inevitably put the Tories back in, maybe in less than 5 years if the mess they’ve left shatters the economy further. My question has always been ‘about if now, when? If not Corbyn, who?’
45 years voting Labour doesn’t seem to count for anything now. I’ll not make that mistake again.
Under first past the post, one more left of centre party is just what we don’t want. We need to coalesce around the party with the best chance of defeating Sunak and Starmer. For me, that’s the Green Party which has shown itself to be capable of winning hundreds of local seats. As a bonus, it has many of the best policies, from nationalisation to dealing with the climate crisis.
For the parallel to work, it would need to be a one issue party like UKIP was. So it must be the NHS Party. I strongly suspect that Starmer & Streeting will continue down the path trodden by Blair – the Americanisation of our health service – (IE a two-tier service used by the F.I.R.E. sector to milk us dry)
The NHS was created & is suppoted by people from all points of view. And unlike UKIP, the national pride will be real & deserved instead of phoney & misplaced.
The NHS and Schools Party?
There is an NHS party. It’s called the National Health Action Party. It once had an MP, although not any more.
At the AGM last month it was not quorate, although it has quite a few members.
It would really like lots of you to join.
https://www.nhaparty.org/
https://www.nhaparty.org/our_policies
Just to show the party has more policies than the NHS.
I know
They retweet me, often
And I know some of the founders
I am a member. I can say that now I’m no longer a member of the labour party.
If you are a member of the labour party you are not allowed to vote for or join any other party.
I get lots of requests to join the Cooperative party, but you have to agree to labour policies and I’m not going to do that while Starmer is in charge.
If you knew about the NHAP, Richard, why did you not say so, instead of just suggesting an NHS party? I know you say you don’t like party politics, but your comments on Corbyn are quite party political. I keep thinking the poor man probably wants a rest now. He’s only a month younger than me, and I couldn’t keep up with his pace.
He spends nearly as much time on picket lines and at demos at the moment as union leaders do.
Anyone going to the March 11th demo run by SOSNHS?
Corbyn is not the only politician I criticise
Doing so does not make me party political
And I had rather forgotten the NHAP. I see it as a lobby group
For the sake of argument:
The party you propose already exists and it is called the Green Party.
(This may be more true in Scotland where I live than in England.)
I could not vote green in Scotland.
I could in England and Wales
The question makes the rather sweeping assumption that such parties don’t exist currently or that if they do, they are somehow exclusive or otherwise unattractive to ‘powerful figures or left-leaning politicians’ and also that the changes to the Tories came from outside and not within. FPTP is the real problem. It does not allow for subtlety or nuance, this is both it’s strength but also its biggest weakness. It shelters and obscures those who govern and those who successfully influence government and we interpret both it’s justification for decision making and the ramifications of it’s announcements and policies through the blunt instrument of the media. Some argue it prevents extremism, but it also makes anyone who is not a dictator or a clown appear about as interesting, exciting and dynamic as magnolia wall paint. We don’t need another party, what we need is a more modern, sophisticated, flexible and open system of government elected by proportional representation. Where funding for parties is strictly controlled and where policy has to be shaped much more scientifically by open argument and discussion and with a long term vision for the people of this country and not short-sighted bigotry and prejudice. Short of open revolt, I believe that such change can only come from working from within to change the existing framework and from within the only two parties that look like they have any hope of forming governments.
The Mixed Member System as practised here is better than FPTP. However, most seats are still FPTP and top up seats rely on party lists. The party decides the order of election. I gather the Scandinavian get round this to an extent by multi-member constituencies.
Single Transferable vote allows the electors some choice over candidates within the party. It is slow and complicated to count but computers can help here. The Irish have used it for 100 years.
Their method of electing a Head of State impressed when I first read of it last year.
As with health systems, we have good alternative system within a few hundred miles of London and we don’t need to borrow ideas from the USA, such as photo ID for voting. In a couple of months time that could blow up into a major row. Potentially several million could be denied a vote.
Surely all this will achieve is to split the vote and let the Tories back in. I too have many reservations about Labour, but I would prefer to get the Tories out first then try and change the Labour thinking, I know that is a tall order once they have power, but if they loose we are all basically f**ked.
Two party politics stinks but it is the only game on the table at the moment.
So after the next election then…..
As I proposed, we do not form a party but a movement that can link the many strands that oppose both the Tories and Starmerism and we oppose them through a mass democratic movement in the unions and in our communties and be active over everything from local gentrification, local pollution to national issues like the NHS, climate change and union rights MPs are free to support as are union leaders. People will still be free to vote Labour, Green TUSC or whatever but if we come together as a united front on all we agree on and fight this government we could be laying the basis for creating a new left party to oppose which every Tory wins the general election. in practice not just in the abstract
Yep, job one is #GTTO in an FPTP system get the incumbents out, then we can deal with the rest of the mess an extra party does not achieve anything other than it makes it easier to win a majority on fewer votes, the opposite of what is needed right now.
This is an interesting post – more interesting than it appears actually. As usual I’m going to make a meal of it.
The concept of ‘the Left’ is old hat to me now. Its day is done. It has been thoroughly undermined by the ‘Right’ and even co-opted into the right. I don’t think it exists anymore as we thought it did. Even now – under an extreme far right government – the left has been made a bogeyman in this country as much as it has been in the U.S.
The Right does not exist either – those old one nation Tories are finished as much as the firebrands on the Left.
We need a new language here folks – using a bit of the old language too. Both the Left and the Right – centrists even – use the language of fascism (the only piece of continuity from the past really and an ever present and dangerous one) to rally support – setting cohorts of people against each other in order to win power. This is NOT politics in action – which was always meant to get a win/win from competing groups in any society or situation. Real politics was always about sharing power and compromises. We’ll come to why in minute.
We have not had a win/win situation in this country for a long time and as for the West in general – well look at the biggest failing state – how the USA conducts its politics and look how France and Germany continue in one way or another to wrestle with the ‘new normal’ as dictated by Reagan and Thatcher (and who can look at Russia now and not feel that somehow the West is culpable for that?).
So what would this replacement for the Left look like (we don’t need to worry about the Right – let them look after themselves damn them to hell).
I go back to post second world war Britain an even post WW1 Britain (which had promised better social conditions but not delivered until after WWII) where what I would call ‘pragmatic politics’ came about. In fact, why not go further back than that? Look at Michael Hudson’s work on debt jubilees; Isabella Weber’s account of how China avoided shock therapy in the 1990’s that the ex soviet union endured and how the Chinese principle of rule held the ancient ‘Guanzi’ principles were brought into play.
What do all these ‘methods’ of rule have in common? It appears to me that what they have in common is a certain pragmatism about them. If the ruler/state did more to help, the state was made stronger by STRONGER people/societies. If the ruler annulled debts, he/she had more people to pull on to defend the country or carry our public works; the same in ancient China, if the government intervened in the price of key popular commodities and protected them from monopolies and profiteering, the people were kept happy, less willing to rise up and cause trouble, more willing to get on making the country work and defend it from hostilities (more loyal, rather than having to fill people with hatred for the opposition as fascist political science dictates).
We know from accounts in Britain from two world wars (and my father’s own accounts) that those men (and women) who went to war were too often in bad health, poor physical condition, poorly nourished and badly educated because of poor domestic public policy geared towards the wealthy.
There is a pragmatism about all of this that goes beyond mere ideology (what I call ‘idiotology’ anyway) and is much older (Bronze age near Eastern and ancient far Eastern) and more sensible than any recent artificial Neo-liberal, Reagan or Thatcherite argument. If you seriously what to defend your country, if you seriously want to compete on the world stage economically, if you seriously want people to work hard and look after themselves all you have to do is be pragmatic about it and look after your primary resource – the population – and support them properly. This means the state having to mitigate socio-economic relations between wealth based cohorts of people, providing health care, education, social security, decent pay for work and pensions to fund old age.
The state does not have to tax the wealthy to create services and means for the less wealthy and the poor. It does not need their money for that. After two world wars, this county realised that it could use its war spending powers to conduct a domestic war on WANT. That’s the key lesson for me. And there is nothing ideological about that. It was pragmatic as were the near eastern and far eastern rulers in more ancient times.
It terms of the wealthy – we need to pay attention to how we deal with them. All I can say there is that their propensity to get rich at the expense of society – damaging takeovers, carpet bagging, redundancies, environmental degradation – the list could go on. But if we re-built our polity and our economics we could not endure these ‘rights’ bestowed on money-power that we have put up with thus far. That would have to change
And let’s not forget the other engine of that pragmatism: Fascism. Fascism as a science and a project is fuelled by discontent and discord (I suspect the ancient Chinese and near Eastern rulers knew this too before the term ‘fascism’ was ever invented) and we all know what history tells us about this. Fascism is a killer.
This is turning into a long post so I’ll try and end it here. I’ve no idea if this could be the beginning of the new left or a new progressive movement. But we would need to set out and explain its principles first before we named it or created it.
We would have to justify it in that this new way ‘made sense’; that it was not ideological – we need to studiously avoid the old language of the Left (although I admit that I am informed in my analysis of the present by Marxist critical thinking but then Marxism was always better at critiquing than prescribing remedies as far as I am concerned) – that we are being logical, self interested, sustaining individuals, society, the planet alike – that is was a win/win, that it was truly pragmatic.
Thanks.
Thank you
While a supporter of the kind of socialist democratic politics that Corbyn represents, anyone thinking a new party would work right now (as much as I would like it) is fantasising. If the Greens, under their new leadership, could be trusted, then I’d say join, work and vote for them. Alas, their sole MP has often disappointed at crunch time, their performance in Brighton as the council was worse, and in Scotland…? It is heartening to see Labour perceiving them as a threat, and setting JLM on them, but their mettle will now be tested.
I don’t think Labour has been ‘tribal’ for a long time; Blair and his acolytes have occupied all the tiers of power since the late 1990s, and while mouthing ‘broad church’ have always killed progress. This was only interrupted by OMOV, Corbyn being a consequence, and Starmer “my Labour” has effectively removed any vestige of real democracy that existed.
TBH most people I know on the centre and left are in despair and may vote for Starmer like a beaten spouse going home after the tenth apology.
If you don’t think Labour is tribal and one of our best parliamentarians is disappointing I wonder what politics you are observing as it is not the same one that I see
By ‘not tribal’ I meant that it’s history. It has been effectively one tribe since Blair’s day, as the levers of power at all levels bar a few CLPs have remained in the hands of centrist/rights, whether union based or simply machine politicians. Policy making was, in the main, emasculated by the Conference committees and compositing of motions, plus the union bloc alliances, if not by chicanery at lower levels (e.g. motions getting ‘lost’ on the way up the path to Conference).
We beg to differ on Caroline Lucas. I think she did, as many Greens have done, reverted to ‘establishment’ when alliance to power beckoned.
I think you wrong on both points
Labour remains profoundly tribal – that is its whole problem. How Cliev Lewis survives when he talks to the Greens and Compass I do not know, and that is precisely because he breaks Labour’s rules on tribalism
As for Caroline Lucas being ‘establishment’, what utter nonsense.
Please add value when commenting hereor don’t bother because I have not got time to deal with this sort of nonsense.
Richard,
What is your issue with the Scottish Greens?
Their trans policy is far too rigid, I think
Hello again Richard. On topic… but only in relation to the wrong opinion expressed by Jeremy Smith (shown immediately after your post).
He accuses you of “begging for funding” whereas my experience of donating to TaxResearch.org is exactly the reverse.
Many readers who have started following you in the past couple of years will be unaware that you once invited subscribers to donate elsewhere… if they so wished. Circumstances were that you had attracted long-term funding from research organisations and thus your income was more stable. I used that opportunity to support another blogger and a campaigning organisation whilst continuing to contribute to costs of your video ‘explainers’. A similar (but rare) example of generosity to fellow-campaigners is Iain Lawson who writes the ‘Yours for Scotland’ blog. After internet costs, Iain donates any surplus to pro-Indy causes such as Salvo and Liberation.Scot. Btw, I heartily approve of you adding Ko-fi for ‘one-time’ fund raising; very appropriate for the uncertain times in which we live.
Thanks Ron
I have two reasons for fund raising
One is I do spend on running this blog and no one directly funds it
Second, when my existing funding sources end I suspect this will become more important and maybe my main funding source. I hold funds back for that.
Third, I keep looking at new ways to work which might cost more. I have not found the right video solution as yet, but it would be good to do so.
The Labour Party has around 432,000 members as of December 2021 (Electoral Commission data)
The Conservative Party has around 172,000 members as of September 2022 (Financial Times article)
The SNP has around 104,000 members, as of December 2021 (Electoral Commission data)
The Liberal Democrat Party has around 74,000 members, as of December 2021 (Electoral Commission data)
The Green Party (England and Wales) has around 54,000 members, as of December 2021 (Electoral Commission data)
Plaid Cymru has around 10,000 members, as of August 2022 (correspondence with party head office)
Therein lies the real problem …. FPTP ….
https://action.electoral-reform.org.uk/page/3782/petition/1?ea.tracking.id=yi2xbabf
Why is the real problem?
You did not say
I think First Past The Post , like several that have mentioned it on here , is a big problem .
I think you will find the labour party has a lot fewer members now that Starmer is getting rid of them.
It had 523,000 in 2020. It was 590,00 under Corbyn and had lost over 200,000 by the middle of 2022.
Below are the official number of fully paid up members entitled to vote in all member internal party elections (NEC and Leadership). These figures are extracted from the official voting returns and reflect the actual number of ‘ballot papers’ issued
July 2017 – 538,606
November 2017 – 525,779
June 2018 – 506,320
November 2019 – 430,359
January 2020 – 552,835
August 2020 – 495,961
https://labourlist.org/2020/11/everything-we-can-learn-about-the-labour-party-from-2020-nec-results/
The latest membership figure that I have is one that was published by NEC member Ann Black as part of her NEC report on the Jan23 NEC meeting. “Paid-up membership was around 382,000”.
https://labourlist.org/2023/01/local-elections-and-the-next-manifesto-nec-and-joint-policy-committee-reports/
It should be noted that unlike the above membership numbers many of the figures that are oft quoted in the press (and by the Labour party) include members who may be anything up to 6 months in arrears. All the above figures relate to the number of fully paid up members at the time.
I voted no because there already is a very successful party doing what you suggest, it’s called The Green Party.
I am pleased that this question is being asked.
I joined the Labour Party in 2009 and have tried to do my bit in campaigning for them at every general election since then. I was particularly enthusiastic during the Corbyn era because I found the manifesto so inspiring. It was a joy to try to canvass people to vote Labour when we had brilliant policies they could get on board with. It was much harder in 2015 when my fallback argument was always “okay, but they’ll at least be a bit better than the Tories, won’t they?”
Sadly, I don’t feel that way any more. I am still paying my membership fee, but I can’t in good conscience canvass for them and look voters in the eye and tell them things will be better under a Labour government, when the policies Keir Starmer is promoting now are often to the right of what the Tories are doing.
Judging by the polls, it is fairly likely (but not inevitable, a lot can happen) that Labour will win and KS will become Prime Minister. Then what? He has no real plan for any transformative change. He’ll govern like a Tory for five years, and then the authentic Tories can re-invent themselves and win in 2029. So at the very least we waste an entire decade.
As Labour Party members, there is nothing we can do about it in the meantime. KS has rigged CLP selections to exclude some of the best candidates with genuine grassroots support, in favour of people who worked in PR for massive firms that are part of the problem. We are helpless now.
I think that a breakaway party would have a very different fate to Change UK. CUK’s only pitches were that they didn’t like Jeremy Corbyn and they would advocate policies as bland as possible. A new left party would actually have the foundations of a programme which is inspiring and will make people think twice.
But, and this is fundamental, it cannot happen without the trade unions. If the trade unions don’t initiate this, then the new party will be nothing more than a glorified Facebook group. A new party needs funding, it needs a good spread of a grassroots membership and it needs officers who actually know how to run a large institution and organise campaigns.
I am at a point now where I hope the affiliated unions leave the Labour Party and form a new party, along with a handful of the brilliant Labour MPs who could act as ambassadors for their policies in the meantime until the election. I personally think that Clive Lewis would make an excellent leader for this because he has the right politics, is very articulate and doesn’t come with any of the baggage that people like Corbyn and McDonnell do. Much harder to smear him.
What are the chances of this happening? Probably slim. But if we don’t have any hope, we have nothing. Sadly, the currently Labour Party seems to want us to have nothing.
I’m torn as to whether that new party should be started now or after the GE. It’s not a foregone conclusion that there won’t be a hung parliament. Starmer does divide people massively. A new left of centre party now would probably push Starmer to modify his policies before the GE. If he wins a GE on his currently polices, not because of those policies but because people want rid of the Tories, Starmer will claim he has a mandate for his current policies.
On balance I think now would be the right time but that party would need to ensure it puts pressure on Starmer rather than go for the GE win which, let’s face it, it would be unlikely to win because new parties take a few years to bed in. Once the GE is over and assuming Starmer has won then the new party could really concentrate on winning the following GE.
Although I admire Corbyn for many things his time has gone. I would like to see Laura Pidcock, Zarah Sultana or Richard Burgon lead the new party and adopt many of the policies of Labour’s 2017/19 manifesto.
Unfortunately Laura Pidcock does not want to stand again. I know because she was my MP before 2019. However, she is doing extremely well organising the People’s Assembly Against Austerity.
I am surprised Richard Burgon and Zarah Sultana are still members of the PLP and haven’t had the whip taken away yet.
Mentioning the whip system, I agree it’s stupid, but if Sunak puts a 3 line whip on the Windsor vote and then takes the whip away from Johnson it will be all worthwhile.
I agree it needs to be a single issue party (although with a wider range of economic and social policies (like UKIP). PR and Save Public Services look like possible runners but Greens and LDP already major on PR as I would expect a new Public Services party to do. But not yet; get the Tories out first then see how the landscape looks.
Political parties are a 20th century construct. They are too rigid, inflexible and plagued by ‘institutional lag’ to allow breathing space for a values-based politics of ideas – necessary to address the multiple challenges we face – to emerge. And their tribalism is unattractive to many. Can anyone justify the whipping system? PR would open the door to the radical reform our democracy needs but it’s equally important that the principles of good government are established concurrently. Work is taking place on this. And it’s happening outside the political parties.
Richard, Glad you could vote Green esp here in east of England. Doing well in Suffolk but not sure about Ely.
As I’m not convinced we will get PR any time soon, I would prefer progressives to coalesce around Greens – wouldn’t want a further split vote on the left.
No sign of them here
Hard to tell whether LD or Labour the opposition here
May elections will hopefully make it more apparent
A reminder that at the last general election one third of the electorate did not vote. So there is certanly a large hole in the current parties.
This makes no sense under FPTP. It would be much better to campaign for Labour to adopt PR as a manifesto pledge. The adoption of PR for general elections would inevitably lead to change for all the parties concerned. Our existing system is not only a joke on the idea of pluralism and representation, it is increasingly regressive and destructive and a threat both to democracy and the union. If Starmer has any sense he’ll adopt PR. Failure to do so merely means that an election can be won or lost on how things go in c.key marginals, ergo, stasis rather than progress.
The LP has adopted PR. Its leadership has ignored that fact.
So what next?
I suspect reality will dawn on the leadership. It is a big ask for them to win power under FPTP, especially since the party’s virtual collapse in Scotland, so they’ll probable adopt it out of expediency.
Interesting question Richard.
I don’t believe a new left-leaning party is necessary to redress the balance between left and right to be honest and when one looks a similar start-ups of recent years, they seem to flame out quite quickly.
For me the far bigger elephant in the room is FPTP which not only minimises the chances of new or progressive parties gaining a foothold, it ensures a predominantly right or left slant with smaller start-ups losing their deposits.
It’s interesting the reactions on Twitter to my earlier post (aside from the insults) seem to suggest the country elected in 2019 a right wing extremist party. But in reality the country voted for a slogan presented by an amiable narcissistic buffer who went on to open the doors for some really appalling, inept individuals for the sole reason of maintaining his position with economic & social chaos the inevitable result. In my view, it didn’t help that Corbyn, however well meaning he might have been, appeared to have allowed his acolytes to take the party a long way off piste making his brand too toxic for too many voters.
FPTP enabled Johnson, Cummings and the rest; but if a new left-leaning party is needed to remedy an apparent shift by today’s Labour party, electoral reform must come first.
All the best.
Backing the Greens is probably the best strategy- they’ve got the policies and they’re already established, and given how far *behind* the Conservatives are in the polls, it’s probably very safe to vote for them without worrying too much that Labour will drop below them and cause the seat to stay blue- even if the Greens can’t take that seat.
Richard,
With apologies to Cory Doctorow writing about the cycle that IT platforms go through and then fail their customers he calls it “enshittification”.
The UK is in the final phase of “Toryenshittification”.
Regrettably the current Labour leadership appears to be on the first steps of repeating this process.
One would reasonably expect Labour to produce anything that gives hope to break this cycle.
But nothing so far. For example:
Sunak ” how lucky for NI to be in the single market and the Union”. Labour ” we are not joining the single market etc”.
How does Labour propose to grow the economy without getting unlimited access to the EU market?
Any practical solutions to deal with the poo pouring into our rivers and coastline? Nothing.
The NHS: Labour “too many foreign workers in the NHS and it’s the GPs fault”.Not all citizens have the right to a decent standard of health.
What about Labour we will repeal the repressive laws introduced about protesting, voting? Silence.
What about making sure that the 30% of pupils currently leaving primary education not able to read and write for their age group can do so? Silence.
It is doubtful that the country can withstand another five years of orthodox economic austerity.
Perhaps only then will there be a groundswell for real change.
Thanks for the poll. I would put myself in a democratic socialist camp, but I’ve been a bit more centrist at times over the decades. I’ve been following this blog (and the Twitter feed) on and off for years.
My concern is that a left-wing equivalent of UKIP wouldn’t work, even though I’m hugely disappointed with Starmer’s Blue Labour. UKIP and Reform shift the Conservatives right, because essentially that’s where the power is: the Tories are naturally in that camp, but moderated for practical reasons. Blunt, divisive, hate-filled politics is a leverage for their fringe groups.
The same is not true of Labour and the left in general. Most of the political power leans right even in Labour: most of the money is there; far more of the media ‘support’ is there; far more of the land is there and probably far more of the working demographic.
The hard-left, also tend to adopt a number of right-wing tropes: often quite Brexity (cf Mick Lynch). I was at an anti-asylum seeker counter-protest last week and the anti-asylum Nationalists were able to combine pro-NHS sentiments with anti-asylum seeker bigotry (“our taxes are going on migrant hotel bills instead of the NHS!”). Nonsense, but illustrates some of the complexity and the appeal of many traditional Labour voters to get peeled off by the ‘Reform’ Party Ltd.
I suspect a split party wouldn’t drag Labour to the left, Starmer would just either conclude we have nowhere to turn and that he can afford to lose those votes. If his lead was threatened due to a split party or he lost seats in local election, he’d jump further right to capture some of that demographic, because that’s where the ‘power’ is. This is what he’s done so far, because he’s shifted from being near the vanguard of the pro-remain contingent of Labour to being staunch Brexit, with all the nonsense that goes with it. He’s lost 20% of Labour membership – I don’t think he’d care until the party membership was lower than Conservative Party membership.
The ability to put Labour under pressure from a more left-leaning faction, I think, would only come once they’re in power: then the left will start to have the same sort of clout that the ERG or the Brexit Party Ltd have for the Tories.
I don’t think it would help the situation at this point. Remember the formation of the SDP in the 20th century arguably split the left leaning vote, letting the Tory’s in.
Having said that, the current lot seem like Red Tory’s. I think politics is currently broken, and voting harder won’t fix it.
Don’t several such exist?
The most obvious to fit the bill might be https://leftunity.org/
Solidarity.
I looked up Left Unity. It is now part of Progressive Britain, which has Wes Streeting on its board of advisers.
Now is not the time to launch a party that will likely split the “left” vote. Such a move could lead to another 4 years of Tory corruption. That is a risk too far.
I agree with this:
By John Bernard (on Facebook)
I’d disagree with the premise of the question that the purpose of any new party would be to get Labour to change direction – Labour needs to be consigned to the dustbin of history, it has too many deeply entrenched structural faults which will always see it moving to the centre and right.
The purpose of any new party would be to replace Labour.
Hi Richard; further to our early afternoon exchange, so sad that his premature death ended your video cooperation with Mark Cooney. However, his work lives on; recently I mentioned your ‘explainers’ (and glossary) to a university lecturer who was ecstatic about such resources.
Videos produced on behalf of ALBA are high quality and coincide with your views on a great many topics… probably because that party has absorbed all your best ideas! Would their be any scope for cooperation with Kirk Torrance after he has finished his stint on the ‘Ash Regan for First Minister’ campaign?
Better still, join ALBA and convince Alex to ‘think big’… e.g. why not stand candidates in ALL our nations? Anyone inclined to left-of-centre politics and electoral reform would feel welcome as a member. ALBA weekly video updates are inspiring, as are meetings, not least because of racial and class diversity. If the Corbyn cohort were to subscribe, that would rectify an apparent age imbalance (or maybe I just feel at home with aged radicals).
As is, I think, known, I know Alex, but I don’t do party politics so I won’t be going that way.
A new left party won’t split the left vote as Labour is in no way left of the political spectrum. We do already have several new left parties and they are a part of the new People’s Alliance of the Left, or P.A.L. Only a single P.A.L. candidate standing in each constituency with a view to forming a coalition if successful.
Jeremy Corbyn’s 2017 and 2019 general election manifestos have been updated by me (Admin Grey Swans pension group, campaigning amongst the 1950s ladies since 2013) and is oven ready for volunteer admin, please, to begin, as it has the omitted Grey Vote policies to gain the last age group left sufficiently turning out to vote, learned by the 1950s ladies of working class women pensioners and us 1950s to 1980s born victims of Tory, Labour and Lib Dems governments alike since the late 1970s.
Us 1950s ladies are the experts (by being victims) in National Insurance and state pension.
The Over 50s & Young Labouring Ages party would be the greatest Women’s Issues party in UK history and would fully end discrimination against women, and against women aged over 50 (ageist misogyny). But for all ages, would permanently end our dire cost of living crisis.
Seeking volunteer admin, please, to begin the new political party, that alone can beat Tory, Labour and Lib Dems in next general election.
www dot over50sparty dot org dot uk
I admit that the idea that a party should exist for an age group seems rather odd to me
I m aware of the pension issue but it does not seem like a platform to me
I find it completely baffling that although you appear to be a sound thinker in other respects, you find it appropriate to ask this question when a fine Socialist alternative already exists – the Green Party. Quite a lot of ex-Labour Socialists have already realised this and joined the Greens, why not point this out and suggest that the “left-leaning politicians and powerful figures” you refer to do the same?
I find it odd that you think it odd that I would not ask a question that attracted such a large reaction. Yesterday was the second largest reading day for the site this year, with large numbers of new commentators, you included. In itself that shows the issue worth debating.
I will comment more broadly in a post this morning. Suffice to say I do not think socialism (a materially based philosophy) and being green provide a clear overlap. Social democracy and being green do. But socialism, I am nit sure.
I have never described myself as a socialist. The term is too unforgiving for me.
I think that we need to still look upon any alternative as a ‘common sense’ one, not allied to Left or Right. We need to pay homage also to the long traditions in human society where rule was for all – near eastern and far eastern models set out above.
It just so happens that the ‘welfare state’ in this country was put into a practice by a post war Labour government. This does not mean that this concept belongs exclusively to the Labour party, socialists whatever.. It’s just that they were in my opinion at least good ideas even when you strip political ideology out
Using debt and austerity as we do in the West to control the population is not democracy and not a rule that benefits all. Allowing the rich to use the stock market to pillage perfectly decent companies/industrial/economic capacity is not an industrial policy, it does not enable capitalism to deliver what it promised – the greatest amount of social utility to the greatest amount of people. It leads to the opposite/
As for the Greens, as much as my heart says that they are a force for good, I find them too limited in terms of their technocratic ability to do anything. They do not convince me that they know what they are doing. There seems to be huge gaps in their vision – gaps that neo-liberalism would all too soon fill – like it does.
Tim Snyder sums up the current situation well – that this is the age of no new ideas but also, it is the age of forgetting some good ones too. This is why Hudson’s work on the bronze age near East and Weber’s work on ancient Chinese state craft are so important now. Why? Because it turns out that human society in history has been grappling with the mis-allocation of wealth in societies for centuries and lots of novel and fair ideas were developed but somehow have been lost.
The next round of political activists and leaders – groups even – need to rediscover what has been lost. That’s my opinion anyway, and it is the only way forward. Tinkering with it – as Keir Stymied wants to do – will not be enough. Otherwise things will stay as they are, and Fascism will grow stronger and make it much worse.
And again I say its neither Left or Right but in many ways is the true centrist position – not the fake version modern political strategists present for the opinion polls.
A lot to agree with
As usual I am late commenting. Starmer is a coward and a bully. He clearly does not want PR but it is essential. What I think is needed in Holborn and St Pancras is an independent pro democracy candidate which the Lib Dems and the Greens can support. They would not field candidates but would encourage members and supporters to vote for democracy, rather like Dr Richard Taylor in Kidderminster (Wyre Forest) in 2001. Have already suggested this to Camden Greens. The independent would not win but if KS thought he faced a credible thteat he might cave in on PR.
The Tories would love to see a new party – it would possibly split the Labour vote and let them back in by default. This close to an election is not the time, tactically, to start anything which could detract from getting rid of them and their corrupt practices.