Tribal politics are ugly. We’re told that the general public hates it.
Like any religion, it’s probably more sensible in reaching your conclusions on the basis of the actual teachings rather than the quality of followers. That said, I respect many people in all the major political parties, including the Green Party.
In Labour, I feel that we cannot afford to be judgemental, almost to the point of blaming the public when they don’t agree with us. I have an issue with how Labour has failed to explain why it spent so much money on the banking sector, to recapitalise its debts. But more than that, I have an issue with why some of the public have an impression that Labour misused taxpayers’ money. A consistent observation amongst various polling organisations is that people trust all parties equally poorly with the running of the economy, but they view Labour to be worse. However, also interesting, is that many members of the public consider themselves to ‘be the lucky ones’ when commenting that public services in their locality have been good. Peter Kellner has often referred to this NIMBY aspect, and it’s particularly relevant as it implies that many in the public do not perceive a link between spending money on public services and improved quality (even if their public services happen to be good).
I consider myself to be libertarian too, in that I strongly believe that the State should not be obstructive to the aspirations of its citizens. However, I feel equally passionately that the State has been allowed itself to have its reputation smeared, together with some poorly-paid and hard-working members within it. This is why before Labour starts attacking the Liberal Democrats on their record it is essential that Labour concedes its poor record in its draconian, authoritarian approach to civil liberties, possibly precipitated by 9/11. Furthermore, Labour did not particularly appear to value well for immigrant workers, it is felt by some; and furthermore it paved the way for the commodification of the NHS, but obviously not to this degree.
And we’re nowhere near 7 May 2015 yet. I think my colleagues who cite a “wipeout” of the Liberal Democrats in local and national elections should be careful what they wish for, as it is very likely a “pure” Conservative government would have been ever worse (hard though that might seem to be.) The demise of a Liberal force in the UK would be dangerous if this handed the Conservatives its first ever majority in over twenty years. It could be that the Tories and UKIP hold the ‘balance of power’ in 2015 anyway, and, together with the boundary changes, we are in unchartered waters.
I do not blame the Liberal Democrats for wishing to make use of this term in government at all, but I feel some LibDems should be mindful whether this has been make or break for them as an opportunity to become “the third party”. The problem is that the Liberal Democrats have always had a tendency to turn things into a ‘one-in-a-lifetime opportunity’ – it will be sad if Labour blame them for changes in the social infrastructure ultimately which Labour started, and which paradoxically only leads to a Conservative majority.
