Alternative Editorial: Wood For Trees
"Can't see the Wood for the Trees," by Derek Matthews.
At the end of week one of the 2019 elections – often described as the most important elections of our lifetime– there is a lot of pain on all sides. While the 2010 elections saw a shift in the two-party system– with the Lib Dems ending up as kingmakers of a Tory government that went on to remainder them - 2015 and 2017 saw an upsurge of clarity around the divide again as first Ed Miliband and then Jeremy Corbyn repositioned Labour ever further Left of the political spectrum.
But this year each side of the divide is in danger of imploding, which – spoiler alert – may not be a bad thing. Yet the process is brutal.
What was once called New Labour - and now identifies as the moderate faction of the party - seems ready to sabotage the rest with all out attacks on Jeremy Corbyn. Ranging from the two ex-Labour MPs who are calling for voters to choose Boris Johnson over the Labour leader. To Tom Watson’s (seen as the defender of the moderates) resignation as the party’s deputy leader the day before campaigning began.
After almost ten years of Conservative rule that saw the decimation of communities through austerity, the serious undermining of the NHS and the chaos of Brexit – causing irreparable damage to relations within Europe the UK itself – the actions of the moderates seems reckless. Are they really willing to give up their chance to change the whole game in exchange for damaging an internal rival?
The Conservative Party, meantime, is also in self-destruct mode albeit more quietly (or with less media headlines). Following the withdrawal of the whip from 21 party members who would not vote with the government to pass its European bill, many have chosen not to go with Boris into an election, despite being forgiven. These are not previously unknown MPs making a name for themselves, but high-profile ministers with strong influence.
Some of these – former Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, former Culture Secretary, Nicki Morgan, former Chancellor and Foreign Minister, Philip Hammond, Rory Stewart more – have stood down as MPs, Stewart hoping to run for London Mayor in 2020. They will get replaced by new Tory candidates. But others may do more long-term damage by deciding to run against the party which could rob their previous party of the seats forever. Either as Anna Soubry, Gavin Shuker and Mike Gapes did by forming a new party – now Change UK.
Or by standing as independents with no allegiance to anything except maybe a political stance such as Remain.
Most famous of these is former Attorney General, Dominic Grieve who has been lionised by the media / social media for standing up to Boris John’s caricaturing of Parliament as “against the people”. Or holding out for a People’s Vote whilst being lambasted as ‘undemocratic’. When he reached out across the traditional political divide for funds to help him run his campaign, he very quickly received more than he is legally allowed to spend.
That’s a small but significant sign that the notion of independents might have some valency in a UK national election for the first time. While past Independents may have been standing in protest on a single issue, this wave may begin to channel a much bigger wave of unrest. Even so, the real-time task of getting elected without a national brand is not easy.
It’s hard to recognise, except up very close, how much MPs are reliant on party machinery. For example, how do you ensure your name is even recognisable on the ballot sheet when the category will only show ‘independent’? If the national news didn’t cover you – which they are not obliged to do - the voter barely knows you exist. Or if you don’t have access to the expensive data research well-funded parties do, you don’t have the same information about which doors to knock on in your neighbourhood to make the most difference.
However right now, with the old politics in spectacular melt-down, the term “independent” may well be a magnet for all those voters who are fed up.In some cases it may even forge a link with the rise of independents at the local level who made a net gain of 250 seats in the last election. Independents now control six councils across England, from Middlesborough to Nottinghamshire, Essex, Surrey and East Devon and hold the balance of power in several more.
Is that in itself a good thing? Some would see that as unproblematically good as it signifies the power moving away from elites and much more widely distributed amongst the people. Others are terrified as they associate people power with the kind of undifferentiated, emotionally triggered populism that allows extremism to take hold.
Two party system is now four. Pic by Miles Cole
From the point of view of an evolving politics, not all these local independents carry the same culture of getting closer to the people. Some are simply disaffected ex-members of the main parties hoping to hijack their capital while cashing in on the general unrest. They are likely to carry the old national level behaviour directly into the local.
Others, like the Independents for Frome or Buckfastleighhowever, are forging genuinely new political culture. Tearing up the old council rule books and inviting unprecedented levels of engagement and citizen participation in decision making and shaping the future.
It is not yet obvious that the newly independent MPs running for Parliament would be in favour of a more independent politics generally. Implying all the mechanisms which make people’s power more deliberative - less populist - such as subsidiarity, direct democracy, citizens assemblies. But once they are out of their old party’s gravitational field, they may well be looking for genuinely new ideas that promise to shift power away from the old parties that alienated them.
But that may be for another election: however loud the call for a better democracy is, this election will be played out on the old terms. Which means in a first past the post, non-proportional system, the winner takes all. Whoever can get over the line in each seat, takes the seat and the other votes are disregarded. Whoever can make a majority in the House of Commons, will be able to carry out their manifesto.
In this context, those of us hoping for the best outcome for our prospects of survival over the long term – the environmental agenda – will need to do our homework. It won’t be enough to argue for a better democratic system in the future; we have to act as if that system is already here by gaming it.
On each side of the Brexit divide, this is already happening. As a Remain Alliance camp, the Lib Dem, Green Party and Plaid Cymru have agreed to choose only one candidate between them to represent a vote to stay in the European Union. As we speak, Farage’s Brexit Party has just decided to stand down any of their candidates in safe Conservative seats, despite Boris Johnson’s refusal to make a pact with them.
But all that could leave voters very confused indeed. Particularly if your motivation is to choose the party most likely to act in accordance with a more democratic, green agenda.
As called for in our last editorial, we need a robust analysis of the party manifestoes to understand which add up to the best coalition of parties to move us in the direction of carbon neutral by 2025. We say ‘in the direction of’ as only the Green Party, with one MP, appears to understand what is really needed. But there are others who are sympathetic, if not bold enough.
Once we have that, we should use the tactical voting sites available to help us make the election of that coalition most likely. For many people this will be a betrayal of the party they normally vote for: although in practice, it should give that party (whatever it is) at least a chance to be part of the ruling coalition.
Without this strategy, it’s quite possible that the less climate-driven manifestoes will win. Not just to slow down the move to carbon neutral, but, in an easily possible scenario, move to actively frustrate it. Maintaining the growth economy for self-destruction as usual.
The long-term gain to be had if we act under the focus on an existential climate crisis, is that those voters who become more fluid in relationship to their traditional party are creating the conditions for an evolved democracy.
If MPs are not able to break the deadlock of the two-party system – turkeys don’t vote for Christmas, they would say - the voters can go ahead and show them how it’s done. This less attached, more independent way of acting in the political space should open the way to a more collaborative rather than raw, competitive ways of working. It might promote greater tolerance of a plurality of viewpoints. Less of the black and white thinking that causes so much pain.
It also gives the voter more responsibility. If you abandon the simple act of staying loyal, you have to do some work to do to figure out how best to vote to achieve the goals you have identified for yourself and your community. Young people affected by the climate crisis are particularly in the spotlight, and there are many stories about them voting differently from their parents in this election.
Of course, not everyone has the desire or time to do that work. And in these early days of a new politics, we’re hoping that someone with resources is going to make it easier for them. So: who’s ready to do the work of developing a green tactical voting site?