Labour: A Plan For The Future

It’s fair to say that this week has been far from ideal for the vast majority of those involved with the Labour Party. Bar the small number of turkeys voting for Christmas within the party, leaving the EU is something undesirable and something that we wished to avoid at all costs. However, it has also presented us with an opportunity, by bringing about the resignation of the Prime Minister, and by changing to nature of UK politics in such a way that it is now quite simply impossible for the Conservatives to claim any sort of mandate to govern. A General Election must be called when the new Conservative leader is chosen, and also before the withdrawal from the EU is completed.

The polls currently show that as it stands, Labour would likely get a similar share of the vote to the Conservatives if a General Election was held tomorrow. That of course would not be enough for a majority, but would put a coalition with the Nationalists and the Lib Dems within reach. But in my opinion, just being able to clinch a majority is not enough — although government by coalition must be an accepted part of Labour’s future. Instead, we ought to be aiming to secure a strong majority in Parliament, predicated by Labour being the largest party. And that is something I believe is completely achievable, if the Labour Party is willing to undergo the necessary changes to make it happen.

Firstly — and I know this will be unpopular with many — we need a change of leadership. Jeremy Corbyn is a pleasant man. A principled politician. An individual of superb integrity. But he is not a unifier, no matter how hard he may try to be one. In order to get the Labour Party travelling in the right direction, it needs strong leadership that transcends factional lines — and Corbyn cannot do that, as someone so embedded in his ways. That is not to say I wish for a Blairite coup, as that would only make the situation worse. What is needed is a leader from the centre of the party, acceptable to all, who can appeal to both the unions and big business, who can unite young and old, left and right, and all the other groups that we are lucky to see shelter under our umbrella.

I understand that this may be unwelcome to some, with memories of Corbyn’s huge mandate large in the rearview mirror. However, no mandate should be so large as to allow the division it causes to harm the electoral prospects of the party — all Labour members ought to put the party’s success above their own sectional interests. It is also not my place to attempt to identify who I believe ought to be next in line for the leadership, all I can hope is that they are someone who can act as a unifying figure, ready to lead us into an election unlike any other that we as a party will have seen.

Moving on from the issue of leadership, and onto the more crucial issue — that of policy. It is important to firstly reconcile ourselves with the reason given for the failure to win in 2015, the perceived untrustworthiness of Labour on economic issues. In the simplest way that is now an allegation that is easy to rebut, as when it is raised by the Conservatives we can stand up and ask them: which party risked the economic health of our nation in order to solve a petty internal conflict? Surely that is the act of a party that can’t be trusted with power.

Furthemore, it is crucial that the olive branch is extended to those traditional Labour strongholds that voted to leave — in particular in the North East, Wales and the Midlands — where economic deprivation contributed to the decision of the electorate in those areas. For too long, we have taken advantage of the voters of those areas, expecting their votes without giving them anything in return. Instead we need to promise large scale investment in infrastructure, education and training in those areas so that they aren’t tempted to abandon Labour and cost us seats to UKIP. The EU being blamed for their condition by so many in those areas is a direct result of failures of government policy for the past 40 years — from both Labour and the Conservatives.

Labour must also do what is necessary to create confidence in the UK business environment. While that may not sit well with some on the left of the party, if we fail to keep businesses sweet then we are doomed to failure — our economy needs outside investment in order to grow. That is not to say we should pander to big business, but that we should instead seek to reassure businesses that we will do all we can to maintain existing trade agreements with the EU — a promise that the leave campaigners likely to be leading the Conservative Party will likely not be able to make with any degree of certainty.

It is also not worth our time to sit there and simply say that we will refuse to invoke Article 50 and attempt to remain in the EU if elected. That is not an election winning strategy. But the fact is that 48% of those who voted wish to remain, and those are the voters who are most likely to be attracted to vote Labour. Therefore, the position on Brexit has to be one that recognises the results of the referendum, but that also keeps those who wish to remain onside. Article 50 should not be invoked until the details of what any agreements between the EU and the UK would be, as only then can a decision be taken with any degree of confidence. It would make sense to call an election or referendum then, to see if there is a mandate for accepting those terms — or whether the UK population is happier to remain as they now know the cost of leaving. Whatever happens, Labour should not allow an exit to happen without a proper assessment of the consequences — and that is where this government has failed in its duty by calling this referendum.

In terms of domestic politics, Labour must first seek to build the alliances necessary in order to get itself back into power. That means working with other parties such as the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Greens and ideally the Lib Dems — if they would agree — in order to defeat the Conservatives in contested seats. This will come with a cost, likely some policy concessions on devolution — a policy which Labour has a proud history of delivering on — and more notably on the implementation of Proportional Representation and reform of the House of Lords. No more are the days in which we can win an outright majority, and PR is not only good for democracy, but also at worst neutral for our electoral prospects as coalition government is our reality currently.

Of course another cost may be that of a Scottish independence referendum and the breakup of the union, but we should support the will of the Scottish people above all else — ditto the same in the case of Wales and Northern Ireland. Scottish and Welsh Labour should both be freed from control from above nonetheless, in order to better represent their unique constituencies. The cost may strike many as an unnecessary risk, but if it the price that has to be paid for power then so be it — especially if it is possible to get the Lib Dems on board, with their ability to gain Conservative seats in many areas where Labour is very weak. Should Scotland become independent, then the need to ally ourselves with other parties becomes even greater to prevent Conservative domination of the remnants of the UK.

To finish, I must add this. Labour sits here with a choice, to either pursue an independent path based around ideological purity of one form or another, or to work in the pursuit of unity and agreement both internally and externally in order to do what is best for the UK. And if this week has taught us anything, it is the cost of failures in cooperation. I haven’t elaborated on much in terms of policy here, but I hope that this serves as a common sense plan for the future — having a clear plan makes filling out the details far easier in the end.