British politics is famous and notorious for its sharp rhetoric and is never at a loss for a good slogan. “Get Britain’s Future back” echoed through the Labor Party conference hall in Liverpool this year, which was resplendent with posters and flyers. “No Future?” So let’s take back Britain’s future.
What was reminiscent of good old punk from the 70s seemed like a desperate attempt to get to the heart of the country’s current crisis without committing too much to the program. There is a good reason for this, because far too often the conservative opponent has taken hot items from Labour’s think tank and then sold them as their own tool. The last time was in March 2023, when the government overnight adopted the concept of free childcare from the Labor program. Since then, the party has kept a low profile. Just don’t make any mistakes. All the polls suggest that you could win the next general election by simply presenting yourself as the sensible alternative to the Tories’ chaos.
This is where the “Ming vase theory” comes into play: in the times of “New Labor” in 1997, the social democrat described Roy Jenkins the election campaign at the time as well as the attempt to carry the priceless Chinese ceramics over a highly polished floor. Since then, the metaphor has become so deeply rooted in the party’s strategic thinking that caution has replaced passionate campaigning. In a kind of “seismic moment” people are currently on the verge of wresting power from the ruling party, not only in England but also in Scotland. 58 percent of eligible voters voted for Labor in a recent by-election in Glasgow. Nationwide projections show that 12 members of Westminister’s ruling Conservative cabinet would lose their constituency unless Labor makes a major shambles between now and the election. The party presented itself accordingly confidently at its annual meeting. They are ready to take responsibility for the country and are aggressively attacking the current governing party, which only met in Manchester two weeks ago embarrassing appearance had allowed.
The public watched with amazement as not only Brexit inventor Nigel Farage, but also the ousted Liz Truss were celebrated like rock stars at the Conservative party conference. Rishi Sunak snubbed seasoned predecessors in the prime ministership such as David Cameron or Theresa May by presenting himself as a “change candidate”, a candidate of change that would lead Great Britain out of the mess, just as if it had not been his own party, who has held the keys to Downing Street for the past 13 years.
Nothing remains of the program of his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn.
Measures against the current misery? None. Economics Minister Kemi Badenoch did not explain an industrial strategy, offered no solutions to the shortage of skilled workers and preferred not to even mention the still missing free trade agreement with the USA. Instead of a controlled influx of skilled workers, Finance Minister Hunt recommended further sanctions in the social system in order to get more people into work. Brexit was praised as a solution and not as the cause of the many obvious problems such as significantly higher costs for administration, logistics, customs duties or cost-intensive IT adjustments while at the same time declining sales for many companies. The British economy reacted with shock to Sunak’s announcement that he wanted to weaken Britain’s climate targets. In Manchester there was no plan, no vision that British society could rally behind. The fear that a kind of “tea party” could take over the Tories dominated the talk shows.
The Tories’ poll numbers are poor. So will Sunak call a general election in May 2024 in conjunction with the regional elections that will take place then? Or would it be more advisable to do this only the following November, when, according to statistical calculations, inflation rates should finally have fallen? Or will Interior Minister Bravermann, who is known to be merciless, focus on selling her “dream” of finally being able to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda as a success story that could be translated into electoral success. In case of doubt, banning rulings by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) would not be observed. After all, this is a Brexit dividend. The fact that the ECtHR is not a judicial body of the EU, but of the Council of Europe is not explained to the electorate in any more detail. They want to regain “control over their own borders” and will win the next elections with this battle cry.
And Labour? The party has closed ranks. Under a giant Union Jack, a state-wearing Keir Starmer took to the stage and promised a “decade of renewal” for the entire country. Nothing remains of the program of his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn. With tactical finesse, he had managed to further weaken the left wing of the party. With the deputy Labor leader Angela Rayner, which is supported by the still critical trade union movement, a constructive division of labor has been achieved. Swing voters are addressed with a new social contract – with an end to “hire and fire” or zero-hour contracts that reduce employees to day laborers.
Nothing remains of the program of his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn.
But companies, banks and business associations are also back on the conference floor. Peter Mandelsohn, a key architect of New Labour, was a popular speaker and urged Starmer to call on unions to exercise restraint. The rhetoric from Starmer and his shadow finance minister Rachel Reeves seemed consistently business-friendly. No taxes – “neither on wealth nor on other things” – will be increased. Iron budget discipline is the order of the day. Liz Truss’s interlude left a national debt of 100 percent of gross domestic product.
Other topics of the election campaign remained only roughly outlined. Five missions are being promoted so far: Britain as a “clean energy superpower”, a strong national health service, the building of 1.5 million new homes on safe streets, equal opportunities for all and the “biggest economic growth in the G7”. You can’t live in Great Britain without superlatives. However, things remained noticeably quiet when it came to the topic of migration.
And how does Labor feel about the EU? There were no controversies about the “B-word”. Keir Starmer has pledged to pursue closer trade ties when the Withdrawal Agreement is reviewed in 2025. This is the only way growth is possible. The party appears to have overcome its disorientation with regard to the continent. Since the 2016 vote, public opinion has shifted. A little more than a quarter of the supporters regret their decision and an improvement in the atmosphere in Brussels can already be seen. However, without something in return from London, no one there will be willing to put together the negotiating packages again. So what could a Prime Minister offer Starmer?
He wants to enter into negotiations with the EU to reach an agreement according to which London can accept an EU asylum seeker quota of migrants if in return the latter takes back the refugees arriving across the English Channel. According to Starmer, this is the only way to stop the drama surrounding the “small boats” in the Channel. The actually decisive election campaign issue is gradually becoming apparent. The right-wing conservative “The Sun” predicted that Starmer would allow 100,000 EU migrants into the country every year and open all doors. The right-wing populist broadcaster “GB News” also spreads fake news about the Labor Party’s plans to re-enter the EU. “Don’t be under any illusions,” Starmer warned urgently in Liverpool, the Conservatives “know exactly where the red lines are and they will continue to move them and continue to cross them.” In the spirit of the Ming vase theory, caution is still the mother of the china box in order not to be led astray in the election campaign.
2023-10-11 16:03:23
#Labours #fear #vase
