This is not the long-awaited progressive moment

The deal being touted in Westminster is a mirage that risks luring progressive politics into the wil

I have devoted a considerable part of my adult life to advocating and working towards a political realignment that would bring Labour and the Liberal Democrats together in a partnership of shared conviction. I worked for Robin Cook during Labour's first term as we strove to keep Lib-Lab co-operation and the prospect of electoral reform alive long after Tony Blair and many of those today calling for a "progressive alliance" had lost interest.

So, it is with great reluctance that I have to conclude that the deal now being touted in Westminster does not herald the arrival of the long-awaited "progressive moment". On the contrary, it is a mirage that risks luring progressive politics into the wilderness for a generation. With no doubt honourable intentions, Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg are leading their parties towards a doomed embrace, the only lasting result of which will be a new era of Conservative dominance and an end to any prospect of real change. They need to be brought to their senses before it is too late.

The vision of a new politics was conceived as a way of breathing life into British democracy by expanding electoral choice, weakening the grip of party elites, decentralising power and creating a more open, pluralistic and collaborative way of governing. The whole project now risks being discredited by the installation of a weak government, sustained on life support by endless rounds of tawdry deal-mongering and the self-interest of the politicians sitting in it.

Anyone who imagines that such a government could play midwife to a new democratic settlement is making a grave mistake. You can't fight corruption with con tricks.

The Conservatives' argument -- that they, as the largest minority party, have the right to govern -- is patently absurd. There is no reason why, in principle, smaller parties, jointly representing the clear majority of voters, should not join forces to claim a superior mandate.

 

A problem of numbers and discipline

The real problem is a practical one: Labour and the Liberal Democrats between them simply lack the MPs required to govern securely, and would become hostage to smaller parties of mercenary intent. This is to say nothing of how the awkward squads within the ranks of Labour and the Liberal Democrats might behave.

By any calculation, the whole "progressive alliance" idea is dependent on a constellation of forces that lacks both the numbers and the discipline to do what is needed in the interests of the country.

The Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru and the Democratic Unionists are already licking their lips at the prospect of using their parliamentary leverage to extract concessions that would cushion voters in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland from the difficult cuts we all know are necessary. Is England to be left to face the pain of deficit reduction on its own? If so, the Conservatives can be expected to ride back to power on a wave of popular revulsion at the next election, and to remain there for a very long time after that.

The nightmare scenario is that a progressive coalition takes power, only to reprise the terminal phase of the Callaghan government, with parliamentary votes squeezed through thanks to shabby interest-bargaining and dying MPs being dragged out of hospital and through the division lobbies.

Does anyone really imagine that the British people, having seen the unedifying chaos a hung parliament had brought about, would then vote for a new electoral system that promised to make it the permanent condition of our national politics? Or are we seriously contemplating the democratic outrage of Labour ratting on its manifesto commitment and changing the electoral system without a referendum? Let's remember that what followed Callaghan was 18 years of Conservative hegemony.

I hate to find myself in the company of knee-jerk Labour tribalists such as Jack Straw and David Blunkett, but on this they are right. Painful as it may be, genuine progressives need to face the truth and let go. If not, the real "moment" may never come.

David Clark is a freelance political writer and analyst. He served as special adviser on Europe to Robin Cook from 1997-2001.

Special offer: get 12 issues of the New Statesman for just £5.99 plus a free copy of "Liberty in the Age of Terror" by A C Grayling.

David Clark was Robin Cook’s special adviser at the Foreign Office 1997-2001.

Getty
Show Hide image

How the Lib Dems learned to love all-women shortlists

Yes, the sitting Lib Dem MPs are mostly white, middle-aged middle class men. But the party's not taking any chances. 

I can’t tell you who’ll be the Lib Dem candidate in Southport on 8 June, but I do know one thing about them. As they’re replacing a sitting Lib Dem (John Pugh is retiring) - they’ll be female.

The same is true in many of our top 20 target seats, including places like Lewes (Kelly-Marie Blundell), Yeovil (Daisy Benson), Thornbury and Yate (Clare Young), and Sutton and Cheam (Amna Ahmad). There was air punching in Lib Dem offices all over the country on Tuesday when it was announced Jo Swinson was standing again in East Dunbartonshire.

And while every current Lib Dem constituency MP will get showered with love and attention in the campaign, one will get rather more attention than most - it’s no coincidence that Tim Farron’s first stop of the campaign was in Richmond Park, standing side by side with Sarah Olney.

How so?

Because the party membership took a long look at itself after the 2015 election - and a rather longer look at the eight white, middle-aged middle class men (sorry chaps) who now formed the Parliamentary party and said - "we’ve really got to sort this out".

And so after decades of prevarication, we put a policy in place to deliberately increase the diversity of candidates.

Quietly, over the last two years, the Liberal Democrats have been putting candidates into place in key target constituencies . There were more than 300 in total before this week’s general election call, and many of them have been there for a year or more. And they’ve been selected under new procedures adopted at Lib Dem Spring Conference in 2016, designed to deliberately promote the diversity of candidates in winnable seats

This includes mandating all-women shortlists when selecting candidates who are replacing sitting MPs, similar rules in our strongest electoral regions. In our top 10 per cent of constituencies, there is a requirement that at least two candidates are shortlisted from underrepresented groups on every list. We became the first party to reserve spaces on the shortlists of winnable seats for underrepresented candidates including women, BAME, LGBT+ and disabled candidates

It’s not going to be perfect - the hugely welcome return of Lib Dem grandees like Vince Cable, Ed Davey and Julian Huppert to their old stomping grounds will strengthen the party but not our gender imbalance. But excluding those former MPs coming back to the fray, every top 20 target constituency bar one has to date selected a female candidate.

Equality (together with liberty and community) is one of the three key values framed in the preamble to the Lib Dem constitution. It’s a relief that after this election, the Liberal Democratic party in the Commons will reflect that aspiration rather better than it has done in the past.

Richard Morris blogs at A View From Ham Common, which was named Best New Blog at the 2011 Lib Dem Conference

0800 7318496