Ed Miliband and David Cameron during the service to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II at Westminster Abbey, on June 4, 2013. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

There's no gratitude in politics - why the recovery might not save the Tories

If the debate moves on to more fertile Labour territory such as public services the Conservatives will likely struggle.

One of the big political surprises in Britain’s history came less than two months after VE Day, when the triumphant war leader, Winston Churchill, ran for re-election against the cerebral and relatively uncharismatic Clement Attlee. Churchill was defeated in a landslide. Historians mostly agree that whilst Churchill’s wartime record was respected, voters, and particularly returning soldiers, trusted Attlee’s Labour Party to provide the jobs, healthcare and welfare state that would make the peace worth living in. The UK’s recent struggles have been economic. But just as the ungrateful voters of 1945 turfed out Churchill, so the voters of 2015 could do the same to their own (economic) saviours, David Cameron and George Osborne.

The UK’s recovery is now in its second year, but it has yet to have a significant effect on the Conservatives’ popularity: in the latest poll their share is 28 per cent, 4 per cnet behind the Labour Party, which has maintained a similar lead since May 2013. One potential explanation is the stagnation in the real incomes of voters, as inflation has outstripped wage growth. That trend looks to be coming to an end, however, potentially ushering in a year of real wage growth coupled with a booming housing market, which could lead many voters to feel wealthier than at any point since the last election.

That will likely aid the Conservatives’ standing heading into 2015 and the polls are likely to narrow (as they do in the run-up to most general elections). But perhaps the Conservatives should be careful what they wish for. James Carville’s oft-misquoted campaign memo, "the economy, stupid", does not refer to an immutable law of politics. The economy is often the most important issue in elections, but by no means always. Indeed, when the economy was doing well, as it was in the UK from '96 -'07, other issues like healthcare and education took on the greatest salience (Chart 5).

Economic optimism in the UK is now at its highest level since records began in 1979. The salience of the economy as an issue is falling fast, whilst that of the NHS and education, Labour’s strongest suits, is rising. The significant lead the Conservative Party has on economic management looks likely to endure in the absence of an unforeseen downturn before the next election. But it also looks likely to become less important to the result.

The big battles of the next election will be fought over control of the agenda. If the health of the economy continues to fade as an issue and the debate moves on to more fertile Labour territory like the provision of public services then the Conservatives will likely struggle to overtake Ed Miliband’s party. The latest debacle over extremism in schools is just the kind of distraction that plays into Labour’s hands and just the kind the Tories have been instructed by campaign manager Lynton Crosby to avoid.

The saving graces for the Conservatives have long been assumed to be Ed Miliband’s weak personal brand and his party’s lingering association with economic failure. Yet the Conservatives’ own vulnerabilities look just as concerning. Cameron’s personal brand is strong but his party's remains stubbornly off-putting to much of the electorate. Forty per cent say they would never vote Conservative against 33 per cent who would not vote Labour. The Conservatives face a huge disadvantage under the current electoral system, which could see Labour become the largest party even if it loses the popular vote by up to 3 per cent. And of course there’s Ukip, which, while it takes votes from all parties, stands to be significantly more damaging to the Conservatives than to anyone else.

The European elections (where Ukip came first) probably showed the crest of the party’s popularity, at least for the next year or so, but the local elections, held on the same day, indicated that the party could have a disruptive effect in a variety of key swing seats, particularly in Essex and Thurrock, where Labour must win seats to become the biggest party.

A "super poll" of swing constituencies commissioned by Tory peer Lord Ashcroft just before the local elections indicated that high Ukip shares in areas like Thurrock would gift those seats to Labour, resulting in a majority for the party of 83. It should be noted, however, that a similar poll held in 2009 projected a Conservative majority of 70 which never materialised.

So what to conclude? More positive economic news should benefit the Conservatives, but could well prove a double-edged blade if voters conclude that it’s safe to switch to the party they prefer with cherished public services. Between now and the election, the Conservatives will do all they can to ensure the economy remains foremost in people’s minds, which is why the chart below is a key one to watch. If Labour can succeed in shifting the debate into other areas, as it previously accomplished with its proposal to freeze energy prices, then David Cameron may soon find himself joining the ranks of respected ex-prime ministers.

Richard Mylles is a political analyst at Absolute Strategy Research, an independent investment consultancy

Chart 5: Most important issues facing the UK

Source: ASR Ltd. / Ipsos Mori

Richard Mylles is a political analyst at Absolute Strategy Research, an independent consultancy based in London.

Getty
Show Hide image

David Osland: “Corbyn is actually Labour’s only chance”

The veteran Labour activist on the release of his new pamphlet, How to Select or Reselect Your MP, which lays out the current Labour party rules for reselecting an MP.

Veteran left-wing Labour activist David Osland, a member of the national committee of the Labour Representation Committee and a former news editor of left magazine Tribune, has written a pamphlet intended for Labour members, explaining how the process of selecting Labour MPs works.

Published by Spokesman Books next week (advance copies are available at Nottingham’s Five Leaves bookshop), the short guide, entitled “How to Select or Reselect Your MP”, is entertaining and well-written, and its introduction, which goes into reasoning for selecting a new MP and some strategy, as well as its historical appendix, make it interesting reading even for those who are not members of the Labour party. Although I am a constituency Labour party secretary (writing here in an expressly personal capacity), I am still learning the Party’s complex rulebook; I passed this new guide to a local rules-boffin member, who is an avowed Owen Smith supporter, to evaluate whether its description of procedures is accurate. “It’s actually quite a useful pamphlet,” he said, although he had a few minor quibbles.

Osland, who calls himself a “strong, but not uncritical” Corbyn supporter, carefully admonishes readers not to embark on a campaign of mass deselections, but to get involved and active in their local branches, and to think carefully about Labour’s election fortunes; safe seats might be better candidates for a reselection campaign than Labour marginals. After a weak performance by Owen Smith in last night’s Glasgow debate and a call for Jeremy Corbyn to toughen up against opponents by ex Norwich MP Ian Gibson, an old ally, this pamphlet – named after a 1981 work by ex-Tribune editor Chris Mullin, who would later go on to be a junior minister under Blai – seems incredibly timely.

I spoke to Osland on the telephone yesterday.

Why did you decide to put this pamphlet together now?

I think it’s certainly an idea that’s circulating in the Labour left, after the experience with Corbyn as leader, and the reaction of the right. It’s a debate that people have hinted at; people like Rhea Wolfson have said that we need to be having a conversation about it, and I’d like to kickstart that conversation here.

For me personally it’s been a lifelong fascination – I was politically formed in the early Eighties, when mandatory reselection was Bennite orthodoxy and I’ve never personally altered my belief in that. I accept that the situation has changed, so what the Labour left is calling for at the moment, so I see this as a sensible contribution to the debate.

I wonder why selection and reselection are such an important focus? One could ask, isn’t it better to meet with sitting MPs and see if one can persuade them?

I’m not calling for the “deselect this person, deselect that person” rhetoric that you sometimes see on Twitter; you shouldn’t deselect an MP purely because they disagree with Corbyn, in a fair-minded way, but it’s fair to ask what are guys who are found to be be beating their wives or crossing picket lines doing sitting as our MPs? Where Labour MPs publicly have threatened to leave the party, as some have been doing, perhaps they don’t value their Labour involvement.

So to you it’s very much not a broad tool, but a tool to be used a specific way, such as when an MP has engaged in misconduct?

I think you do have to take it case by case. It would be silly to deselect the lot, as some people argue.

In terms of bringing the party to the left, or reforming party democracy, what role do you think reselection plays?

It’s a basic matter of accountability, isn’t it? People are standing as Labour candidates – they should have the confidence and backing of their constituency parties.

Do you think what it means to be a Labour member has changed since Corbyn?

Of course the Labour party has changed in the past year, as anyone who was around in the Blair, Brown, Miliband era will tell you. It’s a completely transformed party.

Will there be a strong reaction to the release of this pamphlet from Corbyn’s opponents?

Because the main aim is to set out the rules as they stand, I don’t see how there can be – if you want to use the rules, this is how to go about it. I explicitly spelled out that it’s a level playing field – if your Corbyn supporting MP doesn’t meet the expectations of the constituency party, then she or he is just as subject to a challenge.

What do you think of the new spate of suspensions and exclusions of some people who have just joined the party, and of other people, including Ronnie Draper, the General Secretary of the Bakers’ Union, who have been around for many years?

It’s clear that the Labour party machinery is playing hardball in this election, right from the start, with the freeze date and in the way they set up the registered supporters scheme, with the £25 buy in – they’re doing everything they can to influence this election unfairly. Whether they will succeed is an open question – they will if they can get away with it.

I’ve been seeing comments on social media from people who seem quite disheartened on the Corbyn side, who feel that there’s a chance that Smith might win through a war of attrition.

Looks like a Corbyn win to me, but the gerrymandering is so extensive that a Smith win isn’t ruled out.

You’ve been in the party for quite a few years, do you think there are echoes of past events, like the push for Bennite candidates and the takeover from Foot by Kinnock?

I was around last time – it was dirty and nasty at times. Despite the narrative being put out by the Labour right that it was all about Militant bully boys and intimidation by the left, my experience as a young Bennite in Tower Hamlets Labour Party, a very old traditional right wing Labour party, the intimidation was going the other way. It was an ugly time – physical threats, people shaping up to each other at meetings. It was nasty. Its nasty in a different way now, in a social media way. Can you compare the two? Some foul things happened in that time – perhaps worse in terms of physical intimidation – but you didn’t have the social media.

There are people who say the Labour Party is poised for a split – here in Plymouth (where we don’t have a Labour MP), I’m seeing comments from both sides that emphasise that after this leadership election we need to unite to fight the Tories. What do you think will happen?

I really hope a split can be avoided, but we’re a long way down the road towards a split. The sheer extent of the bad blood – the fact that the right have been openly talking about it – a number of newspaper articles about them lining up backing from wealthy donors, operating separately as a parliamentary group, then they pretend that butter wouldn’t melt in their mouths, and that they’re not talking about a split. Of course they are. Can we stop the kamikazes from doing what they’re plotting to do? I don’t know, I hope so.

How would we stop them?

We can’t, can we? If they have the financial backing, if they lose this leadership contest, there’s no doubt that some will try. I’m old enough to remember the launch of the SDP, let’s not rule it out happening again.

We’ve talked mostly about the membership. But is Corbynism a strategy to win elections?

With the new electoral registration rules already introduced, the coming boundary changes, and the loss of Scotland thanks to decades of New Labour neglect, it will be uphill struggle for Labour to win in 2020 or whenever the next election is, under any leadership.

I still think Corbyn is Labour’s best chance. Any form of continuity leadership from the past would see the Midlands and north fall to Ukip in the same way Scotland fell to the SNP. Corbyn is actually Labour’s only chance.

Margaret Corvid is a writer, activist and professional dominatrix living in the south west.