Every Labour member wants a Labour Government. How many can
believe that such a thing is conceivable within a decade, when so many factors
stand in the way: a resurgent Tory Party; the adoption of alternative parties
by those whom Labour used to think of as tribal; the wipe-out in Scotland; the
forthcoming boundary changes; the lack of a compelling Labour narrative; and
the endless infighting within the party? So what are we who share socialist
values to do, not merely to belong but to win power through which to restore
such values to the governance of the country?
There is much talk of a Progressive Alliance, in which those
sharing liberal values – Greens, LD, ScotNat, Plaid and Labour – agree seat by
seat on a single candidate. This sounds attractive, with less in-constituency
competition and aggregation of the votes from supporters of all progressives,
like defeating a government bill in parliament. A set of values which are
sufficiently shared by all could be conceived as glue.
But are there not flaws in this idea? Oh yes. When members
of the same party frequently fall out over its direction or leadership, how
realistic is it for tribes usually in conflict to agree, not for a Big Idea but
simply to defeat A N Other? How enthusiastic and well-briefed on another party’s
agenda can be those who are motivated enough to campaign? And will a socialist,
say, feel truly empowered by an elected LibDem? Personalities may play a part
in making this possible in some wards, divisions or constituencies; but what about
those where this does not apply?
For a Progressive Alliance to work on a scale sufficient to
win power in parliament, it will have to work across the nations. Can the
leadership and supporters of our parties ever arrive at such an alliance in a
system designed for and steeped in conflict? Until the system is itself
addressed, probably not. Acceptance is needed first that the old 2-Party
structure is no longer relevant. Labour’s tribe is a shrivelled rump searching
rather cluelessly for a true purpose. The Tories hold themselves together by constant
reinvention and iron discipline but could and probably should be at least two
parties. Other parties clamour to be heard but with first-past-the-post never
will be.
People all over the country are searching for inspiring
leaders who seem to understand them, not necessarily within traditional
political parties. So there is a need for a system which can accept all of
these realities, enfranchising and engaging more [especially younger people] in
the governance of their country.
Any alliance must surely be preceded by two initiatives,
therefore: Proportional Representation, so that every vote counts and all
voters feel a chance of being represented; and a revitalisation of properly
funded local government, not just embodied in a few metropolitan mayors but
everywhere, so that voters feel that they are influencing their own lives. Given
these two building blocks, a Progressive Alliance may become not just an
idyllic dream but a practical possibility. Multi-party representation in a
given geographical area may lead to cross-party collaboration or at least
organised tactical voting in a way unlikely today. Change has to start with
fair voting and engagement of the public in matters to which they can relate:
local housing, jobs, transport, healthcare; and with people they see working
for them closer to home than the Ivory Towers of Westminster. The old duopoly
will not give up its power base without a fight but Labour may just be in a
position where it has to change or die. Maybe that change may lead to a part in
a Progressive Government.
No comments:
Post a Comment