Here’s an interesting thing: many of the “new”, much younger supporters who started “Milifandom” are now supporting the Jeremy Corbyn campaign to be the new Labour leader. Yes, some young people are interested in politics. That’s good news, isn’t it? Well, yes it is, actually because young people are the ones on the frontline in the vicious assault of this Conservative government. The hundreds of thousands of them not in education or training, those excluded from the increase to the minimum wage, the tripling of tuition fees and the end to maintenance grants and nearly one million unemployed youngsters. The young have been the hapless victims of Osbornomics, whilst the old have been protected, for one reason: young people don’t vote and old people do. Are we seeing the start of a change in the attitudes of the young and if so what will the consequences be?
It is not just in this country where the young have suffered following the financial crash of 2008. In Greece, some 60% of people aged between 18 and 24 do not have jobs, in Spain the figures are not much better. Syriza enthused the young and the party itself obliterated the established parties back in January, although sadly it has not changed what has happened in Greece one jot. How can we capture the interest of the young and keep it?
Corbyn certainly appears to be something different. He does not always talk in the guarded tones of the other leadership candidates and whilst he does not have a specific message, neither do they, and his soundbites, unencumbered by cabinet responsibility and loyalty, resonate well with many young people. He calls it like it is, they are saying, and who am I do diss their views? If I set to one side the painful realities of life, I could find myself agreeing with many of the things that Corbyn says. Better still, if he doesn’t agree with something, he votes against it in parliament, regardless of what the Labour Party’s actual policies are. A free spirit. Let’s have more free spirits like him. But then what?
What a group of young people say and what Labour Party members are saying is vitally important, after all what is the party for? Corbyn has more constituency nominations than any other candidate, he will have the support of the big unions like UNITE and the GMB. He could actually win this thing and if he does we can all choose what to do next. However, what those within the Labour Party are saying is not what the public is saying. And there is the dilemma.
My own view is that a Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party would be car crash politics of the highest level. Party policy is not decided solely by the leader, so you would have the farcical sight of Corbyn voting against the opposition of which he was leader on something like 25% of issues because that is what he has always done. Corbyn doesn’t do compromise and there is nothing to suggest he is going to change anytime soon and if he suddenly decided to loyally follow the whip, how would you know if he meant it? And how would he put together a cabinet? I cannot speak for others, but I would be amazed if many of the current shadow cabinet members would want to serve under Corbyn. Instead, his shadow cabinet would include the likes of Diane Abbott and John McDonnell who have, throughout the political careers, ploughed a lonely furrow on the far left fringes of politics saying and doing what the hell they like. He’d struggle to put a front bench together at all, in my opinion.
The choice is quite simple really: does Labour choose a leader to win or does it choose political purity? Does Labour operate as a broad church and try to win the middle ground in politics where elections are won and lost, or does it opt for a narrow hard left socialist manifesto and lose heavily? Love it or hate it, elections really are won in the middle ground, largely among the middle classes. Labour must never desert its working class roots and not fight first for the less well off, but it will not attract the large number of extra voters it needs to win a future general election.
I see no glory in opposition because when you have no power, you have nothing. It is a tough choice in many ways but a much easier one in others. I have always believed that in order to change society for the better so it works for the many, not the few, you do so by a process of evolution. First, you need to bring more people into the big tent and then, once you have power and exercised it responsibly, you can then prepare the electorate for the next stage. “You liked the minimum wage. Now we will introduce a living wage. You see how we have allowed publicly owned railways to operate in the franchise system with cheaper fares and better services, now future franchisees will all be from the public sector and it will be a better deal for you, the taxpayer. You love the NHS so we will ensure that it remains as part of the public sector. It will not be run for profit, it will be run in order to treat patients. All these things cost money, so we will increase National Insurance by 1% in order to pay for the new Health and Care service. We will show you where your money goes and we promise not a penny will be wasted.” That sort of thing. These things will not be effective within the pages of a manifesto, still less in a print media where only two newspapers, the Guardian and the Mirror, would publicise them. First, Labour must win and I do not think a hard left Labour can win.
Look at the obstacles Labour now faces:
It has been nearly extinguished in Scotland
Ukip has taken many votes from Labour
Younger people don’t vote
Older people do vote and they mainly vote Tory
The media hates Labour
Labour is not trusted on the economy
There are probably many more reasons, but these are enough to be going on with.
That the other candidates have not, yet, enthused the young saddens me no end, but they have the best part of five years to do that, whoever wins. In many ways, we can thank Corbyn for his part in getting the party to stop navel gazing and get on with the business of trying to help Labour win, although I strongly agree with Margaret Beckett who was indeed a “moron”, as she described herself, for helping him to get on the ballot paper in the first place. If Corbyn wins, she and the likes of Frank Field will have a lot to answer for.
I say again, the Labour leadership contest really is between having a party that can win a general election by bringing more people into the tent and the one that reflects the impotence of opposition. For some people, an election defeat on a hard left programme would be enough. “At least we fought on a pure socialist programme. I feel much better now, even though the NHS will now be fully privatised, the poor will be abandoned to food banks and their children will be sent back up chimneys. My conscience is clear”. I don’t think that’s socialism, either, the politics of “I’m all right, Jack”, which is why Labour needs to wake up, smell the coffee and provide the electorate a clear vision of how a more equal, fairer, more aspirant Britain will look like and how it will benefit us all, old and young. Then we have a chance.
