The existing mood inside parliamentary Labour members nowadays adheres to a Shakespearean principle. It affirms that the extent of every hardship can only be measured against unknown future disasters. As the playwright makes the outcast offspring of the blinded Earl of Gloucester say in the play: “The direst is absent, as long as we can say ‘this marks the bottom’.”
A Succession of Worsening Crises
As per this principle, you won't find any public opinion measure so pessimistic for Labour that it can't be followed by a subsequent worse one; no fiscal forecast so bad that the Treasury cannot worsen it with conflicting messages on tax; no doubts regarding the leader that won't be heightened via hostile communications concerning a bid for power.
Refugee Measures Declaration
Against this backdrop, the recent revelation of strategies that aim to limit the number of asylum seekers admitted to Britain, modelled on a notoriously mean Scandinavian model, was taken better with Labour MPs than might have been expected. There were sparks of MP frustration yet no wildfire of dissent.
Strengthening refugee regulations is not the government's preferred area, but the current system is obviously flawed and the public is enraged. The majority of representatives understand the position that open-mindedness and community cohesion are more readily developed if assurance exists that the country's boundaries are secure.
Increasing Dissatisfaction
Quiet backbenches can also be threatening. Parliamentarians have realized that everything is negotiable alongside a purposeless head with flexible principles. Today's declarations could be withdrawn tomorrow. There is no need to advance hastily if successes can be achieved through persistence.
A common complaint concerns the Prime Minister is hardly managing the cabinet in any meaningful way, having delegated policy decisions to his chief of staff. This doesn't imply the prime minister lacks executive dynamism, he just prefers to refrain from intervening in departmental disputes or engage in long debates.
Management Method
The Prime Minister entered organized political activity during later professional life, originally joining the legislature during his early fifties. He has no feel for Labour lore – the body of former discussions, campaigns, figures and cultural references that bind a head to the wider movement and its feeling of collective mission.
His innermost beliefs stay concealed to government members. According to an experienced representative explains: “The leader is remarkably distinct as head of government through suggesting that his private opinions remain personal matters.”
Political Consequences
The product packaged as the Prime Minister in last year's election campaign has likewise failed to provide its claimed rewards: executive proficiency leading to societal regeneration. Assuming Britain possessed a dual-party structure, the recollection of how bad things were during Conservative rule may continue tolerance for the party.
It indicates a massacre for party representatives in council and regional polls next May. It shall represent a moment of extreme peril for the leader, if he endures until then.
Leadership Questions
Missing from these calculations is agreement on the identity of a successor and how their programme may differ from the current government's agenda. This flaw regarding changeover preparations is cited by those backing the incumbent as one of many reasons to stick with the current leader.
Although discontented representatives could hesitate regarding these alerts, they similarly perceive in them the recognizable, meaningless sound of limited aspiration which causes hopelessness regarding present circumstances. It signifies the tone of inability to characterize the leadership as anything more than a series of strategies for holding power.
Concluding Thoughts
It is hard to summon loyalty to such a cause. And most Labour MPs have tried. They have stuck with official positions, justified it to constituents, heeded instructions, believed assurances that their concerns were heard.
Regicide contains considerable peril, yet, might it be more dangerous than pretending that the present leader possesses solutions about important matters that he never even names? The literary maxim suggests prudence when removing a sitting prime minister. The successor might prove more disastrous.
“The burden of this troubled period we must obey; Speak what we feel, rather than expected statements.”
