The current sentiment among Labour MPs nowadays follows a Shakespearean principle. It declares that the magnitude of each adversity is solely measured against unforeseen calamities. As the playwright lets the banished son of the sightless nobleman declare within the tragedy: “The worst does not exist, so long as we are able to utter ‘this is the worst’.”
A Succession of Deepening Crises
Per Edgar's law, there is no opinion poll so dismal regarding the party that it can't be coming after a subsequent worse one; no fiscal forecast so terrible that the exchequer cannot worsen via conflicting messages on tax; no misgivings concerning the Prime Minister that can't be amplified via hostile communications regarding a contest for leadership.
Immigration Rules Declaration
Considering this situation, the latest announcement of plans designed to restrict the quantity of displaced persons granted entry to Britain, based upon a famously strict Scandinavian model, went down more favorably with Labour MPs than might have been expected. There appeared glimmers of backbench anger but no conflagration of dissent.
Strengthening refugee regulations is far from the government's preferred area, but the current system is obviously flawed while citizens are furious. Numerous parliamentarians grasp the argument that tolerance and community cohesion are more readily developed when there is confidence that the nation's borders remain protected.
Growing Discontent
Quiet backbenches can also be ominous. MPs have learned that everything is negotiable under an aimless chief with flexible principles. What is announced today could be withdrawn tomorrow. There is no need to rush over the top when victories can be won via endurance.
A regular criticism concerns the Prime Minister is hardly managing the government at all, having delegated political judgment to his principal advisor. This doesn't imply the prime minister is without administrative energy, he simply favors not to mediate in departmental disputes or undertake protracted arguments.
Management Method
The leader joined political parties late in his career, initially becoming an MP when he was fifty-two. He misses understanding for Labour lore – the canon of past debates, initiatives, figures and social allusions that bind a head to the wider movement and its sense of collective mission.
His most personal values remain unknown including to ministers. As one senior Labour figure puts it: “The leader is remarkably distinct as a prime minister through suggesting that his individual beliefs is none of your business.”
Political Consequences
The product packaged as the Prime Minister in the recent polling battle has also not delivered its claimed rewards: executive proficiency leading to national renewal. Had the UK maintained a dual-party structure, the memory of how bad things were under the Tories might prolong acceptance of the administration.
That presages a massacre of Labour candidates in council and regional polls during the upcoming vote. It will be a moment of extreme peril for the leader, if he endures until then.
Future Considerations
Absent in these assessments appears unity concerning the individual of a successor and their proposed policies may differ compared to present strategies. This weakness within succession arrangements is mentioned by the prime minister's defenders among numerous justifications to continue supporting the existing prime minister.
While restive MPs may flinch at such cautions, they also hear through them the well-known, empty ringing of low ambition that creates despondency with current conditions. It is the sound of failure to describe the approach as anything more than a set of methods for maintaining position.
Ending Reflections
It remains challenging to summon loyalty to such a cause. The majority of representatives have attempted. They have stuck with the party line, defended it on the doorstep, obeyed the whips, accepted guarantees that their issues received attention.
Prime ministerial ousting contains considerable peril, but is it riskier than pretending that the present leader holds responses to big questions which he doesn't identify? The Shakespearean principle suggests prudence in ousting a current head of government. The replacement may turn out poorer.
“The heaviness of this sad time we have to accept; Speak what we feel, instead of proper declarations.”
