Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. The worst thing the Tories can do is catch the Ukip bug (Guardian)

Eastleigh punished Cameron for not finishing his modernisation project, says Jonathan Freedland. Now Conservative voters have somewhere else to go.

2. The case of Brussels and banker bonuses (Financial Times)

Europe has found a way to attack the UK that is sure to be favoured by much of the British public, writes Martin Wolf.

3. Two fingers up, but government not down (Times) (£)

The Eastleigh result means Clegg can still work with Cameron, writes Matthew Parris. That’s more important than any UKIP protest vote.

4. I used to argue when people said 'all parties are all the same’. I don’t now (Daily Telegraph)

Voters are punishing politicians who have lost touch with normal human instincts, says Charles Moore.

5. We have a long way to go before our immigration system is fair and simple (Independent)

I support tough controls on immigration, but the government has focused on the wrong end of the stick, says Labour's shadow immigration minister Chris Bryant.

6. Can Cameron prove himself a winner? (Daily Telegraph)

A new path to prosperity is the only means by which the Prime Minister and the Chancellor can return the Tories to favour, says a Telegraph editorial.

7. The west babbles on, and Assad is the winner (Independent)

Talks in Rome did nothing to hide the fact Syria's people have been betrayed, says Robert Fisk.

8. Grotesque myth that Red Ed leads a 'one nation' party (Daily Mail)

This electoral snub proves the party’s complete disconnection from hard-pressed and striving voters in the south of England, says Simon Heffer.

9. Beware of misreading Eastleigh result (Financial Times)

The by-election is a political, not electoral, problem for David Cameron, writes Robert Shrimsley.

10. What Labour could learn from Hollywood (Guardian)

Persona is as important in politics as it is in the movies, writes Marina Hyde. If only Ed Miliband would dump Ed Balls and recast Alistair Darling.

Getty
Show Hide image

Inside the progressive alliance that beat Zac Goldsmith in Richmond

Frantic phone calls, hundreds of volunteers, and Labour MPs constrained by their party. 

Politics for a progressive has been gloomy for a long time. On Thursday, in Richmond Park of all places, there was a ray of light. Progressive parties (at least some of them) and ordinary voters combined to beat Ukip, the Tories and their "hard Brexit, soft racist" candidate.

It didn’t happen by accident. Let's be clear, the Liberal Democrats do by-elections really well. Their activists flood in, and good luck to them. But Richmond Park was too big a mountain for even their focused efforts. No, the narrow win was also down to the fast growing idea of a progressive alliance. 

The progressive alliance is both a defensive and offensive move. It recognises the tactical weakness of progressives under first past the post – a system the Tories and their press know how to game. With progressive forces spilt between Labour, Liberal Democrats, Greens, the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Women’s Equality Party and more – there is no choice but to co-operate, bring in proportional representation and then a whole new political world begins.

This move opens up the wider strategy – to end the domination of the City, and right-wing newspapers like the Mail, so Britain can have a real debate and make real choices about what sort of economy and society it wants. A pipedream? Well, maybe. But last night the fuse was lit in Richmond Park. The progressive alliance can work.

Months before the by-election, the pressure group for a progressive alliance that I chair, Compass, the Greens, and some Labour, Liberal Democrat and SNP MPs and activists, began considering this. The alternative after Brexit was staring into the void.

Then the Tory MP Zac Goldsmith stepped down over Heathrow. To be fair, he had pledged to do this, and we should have been better prepared. In the event, urgent behind-the-scenes calls were made between the Greens and the Liberal Democrats. Compass acted as the safe house. The Greens, wonderfully, clung onto democracy – the local party had to decide. And they decided to stand up for a new politics. Andree Frieze would have been the Green candidate, and enjoyed her moment in the autumn sun. She and her party turned it down for a greater good. So did the Women’s Equality Party.

Meanwhile, what about Labour? Last time, they came a distant third. Again the phones were hit and meetings held. There was growing support not to stand. But what would they get back from the Liberal Democrats, and what did the rules say about not standing? It was getting close to the wire. I spent an hour after midnight, in the freezing cold of Aberdeen, on the phone to a sympathetic Labour MP trying to work out what the party rule book said before the selection meeting.

At the meeting, I am told, a move was made from the floor not to select. The London regional official ruled it out of order and said a candidate would be imposed if they didn’t select. Some members walked out at this point. Where was the new kinder, gentler politics? Where was membership democracy? Fast forward to last night, and the Labour candidate got less votes than the party has members.

The idea of a progressive alliance in Richmond was then cemented in a draughty church hall on the first Tuesday of the campaign – the Unitarian Church of course. Within 48 hours notice, 200 local activist of all parties and none had come together to hear the case for a progressive alliance. Both the Greens and Compass produced literature to make the case for voting for the best-placed progressive candidate. The Liberal Democrats wove their by-election magic. And together we won.

It’s a small victory – but it shows what is possible. Labour is going to have to think very hard whether it wants to stay outside of this, when so many MPs and members see it as common sense. The lurch to the right has to be stopped – a progressive alliance, in which Labour is the biggest tent in the campsite, is the only hope.

In the New Year, the Progressive Alliance will be officially launched with a steering committee, website and activists tool-kit. There will also be a trained by-election hit squad, manifestos of ideas and alliances build locally and across civil society.

There are lots of problems that lie ahead - Labour tribalism, the 52 per cent versus the 48 per cent, Scottish independence and the rest. But there were lots of problems in Richmond Park, and we overcame them. And you know, working together felt good – it felt like the future. The Tories, Ukip and Arron Banks want a different future – a regressive alliance. We have to do better than them. On Thursday, we showed we could.

Could the progressive alliance be the start of the new politics we have all hoped for?

Neal Lawson is the Chair of Compass, the pressure group for the progressive alliance.

Neal Lawson is chair of the pressure group Compass, which brings together progressives from all parties and none. His views on internal Labour matters are personal ones.