The prevailing atmosphere among Labour MPs nowadays adheres to a literary maxim. It affirms that the extent of every hardship can only be measured against unforeseen calamities. As Shakespeare lets the outcast offspring of the sightless nobleman of Gloucester say in King Lear: “The most terrible does not exist, so long as we can say ‘this represents the lowest point’.”
A Series of Intensifying Difficulties
Per this principle, there is no public opinion measure so gloomy about the government that cannot be coming after another more depressing; no fiscal forecast so poor that the exchequer won't exacerbate through conflicting messages regarding taxation; no reservations regarding the leader that cannot be intensified by malevolent briefing concerning a bid for power.
Refugee Measures Revelation
In that context, this week's revelation of strategies that aim to reduce the amount of refugees granted entry to the UK, modelled on an infamously harsh Nordic approach, was received more favorably with Labour MPs than predicted. There were sparks of backbench anger yet no wildfire of opposition.
Tightening asylum rules does not represent the government's preferred area, but the current system is clearly failing and the public is enraged. The majority of representatives grasp the argument that open-mindedness and social unity are easier to cultivate provided there is trust that national frontiers remain protected.
Growing Discontent
Silent parliamentary rows can also be ominous. Parliamentarians have realized that everything is negotiable alongside a purposeless head of malleable conviction. Current proclamations might be reversed shortly. There exists no necessity to rush over the top if successes can be achieved via endurance.
A regular criticism concerns the Prime Minister is hardly managing the administration at all, after assigning strategic choices to his chief of staff. That isn't to say the head of government misses managerial vigor, he simply favors not to mediate between ministry conflicts or participate in extended discussions.
Management Method
The leader joined political parties late in his career, initially becoming an MP during his early fifties. He lacks instinct about movement history – the collection of past debates, campaigns, characters and social allusions which link a chief to the larger group and its perception of shared purpose.
His deepest convictions stay concealed even to the cabinet. As one senior Labour figure puts it: “Keir is highly unusual as a prime minister through suggesting that whatever he personally thinks is none of your business.”
Political Consequences
The product packaged as the Prime Minister in the recent polling battle has also not delivered its promised advantages: managerial competence culminating in societal regeneration. If Britain still had a dual-party structure, the recollection of previous difficulties under the Tories may continue acceptance of the administration.
This foreshadows a devastating defeat for party representatives in council and national assembly contests next May. It would constitute a time of great danger for the leader, if he endures that long.
Succession Concerns
Missing from these calculations appears unity concerning the individual of a successor and their intended agenda may differ from the current government's agenda. This weakness regarding changeover preparations is mentioned by supporters of the leader as one of many reasons to continue supporting the current leader.
Even as unhappy parliamentarians might recoil from those warnings, they likewise detect in them the well-known, hollow knell of modest goals that induces despair regarding present circumstances. It represents the noise of failure to characterize the leadership as anything more than a series of strategies for clinging on.
Ending Reflections
It proves difficult to generate allegiance toward such a purpose. And most Labour MPs have attempted. They have stuck with official positions, supported it during canvassing, followed party discipline, trusted promises that their issues received attention.
Regicide is fraught with risk, yet, might it be more dangerous than pretending that the current ruler holds responses to big questions which he doesn't identify? The Shakespearean principle suggests prudence regarding the replacement of a sitting prime minister. The alternative may turn out poorer.
“The heaviness of this sad time we must obey; Express genuine emotions, not what we ought to say.”
