Morning Call: pick of the comment

The ten must-read pieces from this morning's papers.

1. Ignore the propaganda and spin -- the Tory party hasn't changed (Independent)

Johann Hari attacks David Cameron's claim to have "changed" the Conservative Party. Even if we assume the Tory leader is sincerely committed to a modernising agenda, he will not be able to defy his party's core instincts for long, especially not with a small Commons majority.

2. World economists join UK fiscal fray (Financial Times)

A leader in the FT says that today's letters to the paper from two groups of economists are an embarrassment for the Tories. The government is right to cut public spending no sooner than it currently plans.

3. Clegg's coalition ruling is one more nail in Labour's coffin (Guardian)

Martin Kettle says that, given Nick Clegg's decision to rule out a coalition between the Liberal Democrats and either Labour or the Tories, a hung parliament will almost certainly produce a minority Conservative government.

4. Look further than the fads and fashions of geopolitics (Financial Times)

We should shun the geopolitical seers who offer us grand predictions about the future international order, writes Philip Stephens. We can draw only tentative conclusions from the rise of China, India, Brazil and the rest.

5. Studying history is vital -- there are obvious lessons for Cameron (Daily Telegraph)

Jeff Randall argues that Cameron should learn from Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher that caution and moderation do not win elections.

6. The car in front will probably still be a Toyota (Times)

Toyota's reputation for quality and reliability is unlikely to be damaged permanently by the current crisis, writes Richard Headland. On the ground, the company managed to mobilise its dealers and design new parts with extraordinary speed.

7. Juries show society at its fairest (Independent)

The absence of racial prejudice in jury trials is an extraordinary discovery, says Andreas Whittam Smith. The finding shows that racism in this country, though deeply unpleasant, is superficial.

8. Troubled waters (Times)

A leader in the Times argues that Argentina's attempt to prevent Britain drilling for oil in the Falklands is harming its own interests.

9. The murder of al-Mabhouh is an insult to our intelligence (Daily Telegraph)

The Dubai killing has jeopardised Anglo-Israeli co-operation in the war against terrorism, writes Con Coughlin.

10. Spiritual leader deserves full honour (Independent)

Adrian Hamilton argues that governments should defy China and treat the Dalai Lama as a political leader, rather than merely a religious figurehead.

Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter.

Getty
Show Hide image

Forget the progressive alliance - it was the voters wot won it in Richmond

The Labour candidate on how voters have acted tactically for decades.

The Richmond Park by-election is both a triumph and a setback for the concept of an anti-Tory progressive alliance. As the Labour candidate, I was bombarded with emails and tweets saying I ought to stand down to prevent Zac Goldsmith being re-elected long after it was technically impossible for me to do so even if I had wanted to. I was harangued at a meeting organised by Compass, at which I found myself the lonely voice defending Labour's decision to put up a candidate.

I was slightly taken aback by the anger of some of those proposing the idea, but I did not stand for office expecting an easy ride. I told the meeting that while I liked the concept of a progressive alliance, I did not think that should mean standing down in favour of a completely unknown and inexperienced Lib Dem candidate, who had been selected without any reference to other parties. 

The Greens, relative newbies to the political scene, had less to lose than Labour, which still wants to be a national political party. Consequently, they told people to support the Lib Dems. This all passed off smoothly for a while, but when Caroline Lucas, the co-leader of the Greens came to Richmond to actively support the Lib Dems, it was more than some of her local party members could stomach. 

They wrote to the Guardian expressing support for my campaign, pointing out that I had a far better, long-established reputation as an environmentalist than the Lib Dem candidate. While clearly that ultimately did little to boost my vote, this episode highlighted one of the key problems about creating a progressive alliance. Keeping the various wings of the Labour party together, especially given the undisciplined approach of the leader who, as a backbencher, voted 428 times during the 13 years of Labour government in the 1990s and 2000s, is hard enough. Then consider trying to unite the left of the Greens with the right of the Lib Dems. That is not to include various others in this rainbow coalition such as nationalists and ultra-left groups. Herding cats seems easy by contrast.

In the end, however, the irony was that the people decided all by themselves. They left Labour in droves to vote out Goldsmith and express their opposition to Brexit. It was very noticeable in the last few days on the doorstep that the Lib Dems' relentless campaign was paying dividends. All credit to them for playing a good hand well. But it will not be easy for them to repeat this trick in other constituencies. 

The Lib Dems, therefore, did not need the progressive alliance. Labour supporters in Richmond have been voting tactically for decades. I lost count of the number of people who said to me that their instincts and values were to support Labour, but "around here it is a wasted vote". The most revealing statistic is that in the mayoral campaign, Sadiq Khan received 24 per cent of first preferences while Caroline Pidgeon, the Lib Dem candidate got just 7 per cent. If one discounts the fact that Khan was higher profile and had some personal support, this does still suggest that Labour’s real support in the area is around 20 per cent, enough to give the party second place in a good year and certainly to get some councillors elected.

There is also a complicating factor in the election process. I campaigned strongly on opposing Brexit and attacked Goldsmith over his support for welfare cuts, the bedroom tax and his outrageous mayoral campaign. By raising those issues, I helped undermine his support. If I had not stood for election, then perhaps a few voters may have kept on supporting him. One of my concerns about the idea of a progressive alliance is that it involves treating voters with disdain. The implication is that they are not clever enough to make up their mind or to understand the restrictions of the first past the post system. They are given less choice and less information, in a way that seems patronising, and smacks of the worst aspects of old-fashioned Fabianism.

Supporters of the progressive alliance will, therefore, have to overcome all these objections - in addition to practical ones such as negotiating the agreement of all the parties - before being able to implement the concept. 

Christian Wolmar is an award winning writer and broadcaster specialising in transport. He was shortlisted as a Labour mayoral candidate in the 2016 London election, and stood as Labour's candidate in the Richmond Park by-election in December 2016.