Return to: Home | Blogs | Bright's Blog

Apocalypse Now

Few predicted the result of the Glasgow East by-election and the consequences will reverberate for some time

Just when we thought it couldn’t get any worse, it just did. The sheer scale of the Labour defeat in Glasgow East (a 22 per cent swing and the loss of a 13,000 majority) makes this no ordinary by-election. The turnout (42 per cent) is only just down on the general election of 2005. This is no freak result.

Ministers have been appearing on the TV and radio all day armed with the now familiar mantra: “we must listen to the electorate” or “we are getting the blame for the economic situation” or “we are not getting our message across”. Each in its way is a coded criticism of the Prime Minister.

The GMB trade union has already called for a leadership contest in the autumn. But so far no one has had the balls to take on Gordon Brown. But it surely can’t be long now. The knives will certainly be out by the time of Labour Party conference in Manchester in September. Glasgow East has shown that no one’s seat is safe, so the pool of potential conspirators keen to secure their place in parliament at the next election has just increased sizeably overnight.

Few predicted this catastrophe. In a poll of experts by the website Politics Home 80 per cent thought Labour would scrape home. This is the same expert panel that was right about the London mayoral election and the Crewe and Nantwich by-election. Of course, they were within 365 votes of calling this one correctly as well, such was the narrowness of the result. But that is hardly the point. As SNP leader Alex Salmond has been keen to point out, the Westminster village just doesn’t get Scotland. Salmond has cleverly represented this contest as the London Labour Party versus the authentic voice of Scotland. The Scottish first minister has out thought his old adversary Gordon Brown at every turn. Interestingly enough, it was the gambling community that managed to get closest to predicting the result. A poll at the PoliticalBetting.com website was split 50/50, with marginally more voters backing the SNP.

The Labour Party is learning the hard way what happens when you take your core vote for granted. The Labour machine was just not geared up to running a campaign in such a safe seat. Maybe, belatedly, the leadership will see the virtues of reforming the electoral system, which allows places like Glasgow East to feel ignored and betrayed. Deputy leadership candidate John Cruddas has been warning about this phenomenon for some time in relation to the rise of the BNP. The far-right is strongest in Labour’s heartlands, which the party machine does not see as a priority as it chases down middle England in its target marginals.

Will Gordon Brown fall on his sword? There’s no sign of it yet. But there comes a point when the party’s fortunes fall so low that Brown must ask himself if he wants to be remembered as the man who led the party back into the wilderness or the man who sacrificed his own ambitions for the greater good of the movement he loves.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

31 comments from readers

Origen
25 July 2008 at 17:57

If Mr Brown is indeed a patriot, he will put the good of the country above the interests of his party, and not resign without calling a general election.

BegbiesEvilTwin
25 July 2008 at 18:33

I did. Anyone who knows the area had anticipated such a reality. John Curtice in the last week said it was too close to call which is not too far a conceptual leap to a Labour loss of less than 400 votes.

James Purnell's idea of pushing benefit cuts for addicts before the election was rash and may well have cost Labour the constituency. The rationale developed by Labour wonks in London to appeal to the few voters in the area who are lucky enough to be in work and resent paying for other people's benefits must have seemed like a wonderful wheeze. In Glasgow East most voters will have close friends and family with some form of addiction (it is almost impossible not to). The threat of restricting benefits to people who live in an area where employment is scarce could only be seen as downright callous if not Thatcherite in manner.

Is Labour learning the hard way? The above suggests otherwise. The idea of Brown falling on his sword hardly matters if the party is financially bankrupt and out of ideas.

Triangulation only works if your voters have nowhere else to go. The issue that many Westminster-centrics fail to acknowledge is that the SNP in it's current form embodies many of the values and ideals that appeal to Labour voters. If the Labour party alienates their natural supporters by going neoliberal, switching to SNP is becoming their only option.

knave
25 July 2008 at 19:22

I don't think it matters if Gordon falls on his sword.

The die is cast.

Also it has the feel of 78.

Every journo is aligning themselves with new regime, as they did in that dark year.

Cohen and Bright already booking their seats at the front of the victory rally.

"If the Labour party alienates their natural supporters by going neoliberal"

You are a perceptive man BET

Martin Bright
25 July 2008 at 19:47

John Curtice in the ???? last week???

knave
25 July 2008 at 19:50

I am sorry Martin

I can't quite understand your banter

knave
25 July 2008 at 20:33

Also Martin tell your mates at the policy exchange and Cohen

Be careful that victories do not carry the seed of future defeats.

BegbiesEvilTwin
25 July 2008 at 23:05

Martin I seen it on the NS website. See here: http://i34.tinypic.com/k2oisn.png

BarBar of Oz
26 July 2008 at 01:34

The only hope the government has is if one of the Blairites has the guts, vision, self belief and confidence to go public with "I am the One" and stake claim to the leadership in the next few days.

Spring the party out of its funk and make it choose.

True, such a person would be taking an all-or-nothing political risk, given they would almost certainly have to call an election next year, and failure would mean the end of their career. But by not acting, such a person is looking at a shortlived time as opposition leader.

Better to seize the day now, whoever you are. Even if you don't save New Labour you'll never look back asking "what if I had?" And you'll always know what it felt like to be prime minister.

BarBar of Oz
26 July 2008 at 01:46

The only hope New Labour has is if one of the Blairites has the guts, vision, self belief and confidence to publicly state their claim to the leadership in the next few days.

Spring the Party out of its funk and make it CHOOSE.

It is the inexorable first law of leadership politics.

True, such person would be taking an all-or-nothing political risk, given that they would probably have to go to an unwinnable general election next year. But by not acting now, that person is looking at a short and miserable term as Opposition Leader anyway.

In contrast, by seizing the day, that person - whoever they are, win or lose - will never look back asking "what if I had?" And would always know what it was like to be Prime Minister.

knave
26 July 2008 at 07:14

Good points bar bar.

It is a mess

I will still be voting Labour purely because Nick Cohen and Brighty are voting Tory.

Nick Cohen
26 July 2008 at 20:01

Have you read this Martin from Oliver Kamm?

'The next item doesn't belong in history, and it doesn't belong in the noble tradition of the exposure of pseudoscience, but it's a pleasing juxtaposition. The New Statesman carries a review of a book called A People's History of the World by Chris Harman. Harman's entire adult life has been spent in the service of the Leninist sect the Socialist Workers' Party. He has edited the party's newspaper and theoretical journal, and is a longstanding member of the party's Politbureau.

Being a leading member of the SWP is no barrier to writing a good book. Another former editor of the party's journal, Nigel Harris, wrote a book a few years ago on immigration, Thinking the Unthinkable, that I thought was excellent. And I concede that I have not read Harman's book. But I note with complacence that Harman's publisher, Verso, carry on their web page for the book the commendation of the 9/11 conspiracy theorist Howard Zinn, likening Harman's work to his own.

The Statesman's reviewer is not a historian but a blogger called Richard Seymour. Nothing wrong in that - except that Seymour is also a member of the Socialist Workers' Party. That's a singular editorial decision, as a member of the SWP is, by definition, bound by the views of the party's Central Committee. The SWP, being a Leninist organisation, adheres to the principle of "democratic centralism". This bizarre concept was coined by Lenin in 1906 as the guiding organisational principle of the revolutionary party. As one political theorist has usefully summarised it (Joseph Femia, Marxism and Democracy, 1992, p. 136): 'By "democratic", Lenin meant that the elected Party Congress was to be supreme over policy. By "centralism", he meant that once general policy was agreed, the everyday decisions of the central bodies were absolutely binding on all members, who were expected to march in step, whatever their private reservations.'

It's no great surprise, in the circumstances, that Seymour is overwhelmed by the profundity of the book under review, which is 'a dizzying tale of change "from below", with political, economic and cultural narratives interwoven, and occasional pauses to point out intriguing theoretical vistas'. The Statesman has an unfortunate record of not disclosing the interests of its book reviewers, and it's time this policy was tightened up. '

I don't mean to lay down the law, but the Elders of Zion infiltrated you into the Statesman precisely so you could use your wicked zionist schemes to stop this kind of thing.

One more mistake, and you don't get to run American foreign policy.

I

Oscar India
26 July 2008 at 20:14

Reap/sow reap/sow reap/sow.

Maybe, rather than laying into elements of the Tory front bench for the last six months over where they went to school (wasn't the Labour Party quite big on not dismissing people on the basis of their social background for 100 years or so?) those who claim to be supporters of the PM might have been thinking about getting their and his house in order. only a suggestion, I probably don't understand the delicate policial sensitivities of the whole thing.

BegbiesEvilTwin
28 July 2008 at 00:48

Nick Cohen: I fail to see the purpose of posting Kamm's article. It doesn't shed any light on anything. Seymour is certainly not my politics but he's a better political writer than many political columnists in the current print media. Kamm can knock out the occasional bit of interesting copy but not very often.

Is it that you believe that the NS is politically beyond the pale? In real terms it's overall political outlook is barely left of centre. Comparing it to editions over the last 30 years you will see how exceptionally moderate it has become.

Don't you think it's about time you looked at your own politics and come out of the closet?

BegbiesEvilTwin
28 July 2008 at 00:50

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

(Chorus)

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

(Chorus)

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

Come on Nick, come out of the closet.

knave
28 July 2008 at 07:23

I agree with BET

At least with Seymour he is honest and the SWP is not my cup of tea but Tory Nick, when I read any of your articles I am reminded of this maxim.

The modern neo conservative (neo liberal economic) is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

In your case, the moral justification is the use of the radical right of Islam.

For instance Brown makes a pro Israeli speech but this is ignored because it does not fit into your Cameroonian conversion because in reality for you it is about paying less taxes, getting invited to the right circles, making money from numpty conservatives who want their prejudices reinforced and sending the kids to private school.

As for the Obama article.

What a mess ?

You seem to confuse an ethical foreign policy with land and oil grabbing.

knave
28 July 2008 at 07:42

Also BET

It doesn't bode well for september when the new regime takes over the NS under the ex Observer Alton clone Cowley.

Out will go alternative views.

In comes Amis, Hitchens, Cohen, and Kamm.

Persoanlly I don't mind the latter but think the former is great danger to democratic debate for the left.

I don't agree with Pilger and Seymour but at least they are different.

niceguy
28 July 2008 at 11:22

At least Hitchens attacks all religions, not just Islam. He's always been critical of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, and the Christian fundamentalist preachers such as Jerry Falwell and the Catholic Church. Plus, he still seems in favour of redistribution of wealth.

knave
28 July 2008 at 11:32

I agree I have soft spot for Hitch and even David Aaronovitch.

niceguy
28 July 2008 at 11:59

Yeah same here with Aaronovitch. Not every article of his is a piece of Muslim-bashing.

knave
28 July 2008 at 14:23

I don't mean to lay down the law, but the Elders of Zion infiltrated you into the Statesman precisely so you could use your wicked zionist schemes to stop this kind of thing.

One more mistake, and you don't get to run American foreign policy.

OK Ben you deleted my post , fair enough but is this not a little irrational.

Maybe Nick had too many lager shandies at the Brownes barby.

I

BegbiesEvilTwin
28 July 2008 at 23:02

Sorry gentlemen. Amis, Hitchens, Cohen, Aaronovitch and Kamm are all far too old school for my liking. Nor can I recall any of them saying anything significant or original for over a decade.

Hang them all. It would be a mercy killing.

knave
29 July 2008 at 07:42

Aaronovitch and Hitchens still believe in a left of centre agenda.

kamm gives mixed messages but can be interesting.

Amis, after reading his remarks about deportation and his endorsement of Steyn's odious racist book is evidence that the ghastly Amis gene has kicked in.

He who cannot be named (see I am learning Jonnymac) is a political fraud

Oscar India
29 July 2008 at 10:16

Heh. Post about the implosion and likely destruction of the Labour government and the comments thread is already a navel-gazing crop of up-own-aunt discussions about the leftist creditials or otherwise of the commitariat.

Right out of central casting and an instructive lession about how the original subject of this post came to be.

niceguy
29 July 2008 at 10:39

Sorry, we just couldn't help ourselves.

But giving the power of the commentariat on politics, it would be hard to ignore their relevence. Also, I doubt labour would of got such a bashing if it wasn't for the conservative media's hatred of Brown.

redharry
29 July 2008 at 17:00

I see Nick Cohen has taken a break from making stuff up e.g. German words that nobody in Germany has heard of (Tantenverführer is a made-up word), non-existent silence on The Daily Show etc.

http://olching.blogspot.com/2008/07/youve-been-cohened.html

Now he gives us this priceless line,

'Have you read this Martin from Oliver Kamm?'

Yes the man who was a full-time smearer of Noam Chomsky has turned to Howard Zinn., who because he like many others wants a full, impartial investigation into 9/11 is labeled a '9/11 conspiracy theorist'. What pray is his theory?

As for Cohen, more on his new best friend the far-right Powellite, Anthony Browne.

here

http://davehill.typepad.com/london3ms/2008/07/anthony-brown-...

here

http://davehill.typepad.com/london3ms/2008/07/anthony-brown-...

here

http://davehill.typepad.com/london3ms/2008/07/anthony-brown-...

here

http://davehill.typepad.com/london3ms/2008/07/anthony-brown-...

Morgan097
30 July 2008 at 01:22

knave and niceguy,

I've added a few words for you both on Martin's "Karadzic & Srebrenica" thread.

knave
30 July 2008 at 08:02

Oscar you are fright but I feel the left will be nazel gazing for a long time.

But why are you so glum.

Your new blue world is soon to be upon us.

Cheer up mate, you sound like a Man u supporter who has won the premiership but the lost the carling cup

knave
30 July 2008 at 08:56

Sorry I meant right. Sorry.

Oscar India
31 July 2008 at 17:34

Knave - no insult could be worse than the ManU one. I'm deeply wounded.

I don't agree with you about the inevitability of a Conservative victory, however bad things look for the Left. Lots can happen in two years (if that's what it's to be). It just never ceases to amaze me how quickly the Left can turn inwards. I have a friend who works in City Hall who tells stories of the last months of Ken which would make your head spin.

It reminds me of that beautiful scene in Life of Brian where the various "terrorist" groups start fighting one another in the sewers and Brian tries to get them to stop by reminding them they should be fighting the "real enemy", and they all say, as one. "The Judean People's Front!"......"No, the Romans."

Etc.

knave
01 August 2008 at 07:41

Yes I love that scene.

I do agree with you. I actually think it will be hung parliament.

The lib dems will hold the key.

Sorry about the Man U, but as a Wolves supporter I must share the misery

Oscar India
02 August 2008 at 09:22

If it's the Lib Dems who will hold the key as you say my friend we ought to team up, for the good of the nation.

Post your comment

(Your email address will not be published)

Recent Posts

The horror comes home

22 January 2009 09:58

Ken Clarke's return

19 January 2009 16:10

A New Deal of the mind

15 January 2009 09:31

It's a New New Deal

08 January 2009 09:51

A year of ups and downs

18 December 2008 09:44

Mystic Mart

15 December 2008 13:06

The two-man show

11 December 2008 09:44

Past Entries

Follow this blog

Vote!

Will Baroness Ashton be an effective EU foreign minister?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker