The Labour Party is playing with fire, risking both its future and that of the country, according to a former leader who led the party for 13 years and through three general elections. While the party is largely made up of decent, well-meaning people, it has an almost infinite capacity for self-delusion, like many progressive parties.
The 2024 election was won not by acclaim but by being an acceptable default option to an unpopular Conservative government. However, the intellectual wasteland of the Corbyn years left Labour without a properly thought-through analysis of how the world is changing and what that means for policy.
The current leadership debate has an extraordinarily retro 20th-century feel, with politicians anxious to distance themselves from the 'Westminster bubble'. But Britain's problem is with a 'politics' bubble, and the politics of the future may be better understood by those presently outside politics.
The government's principal problem is not Keir Starmer's personality or a failure to communicate achievements, but the lack of a worked-out, coherent plan for the country in a fast-changing world. It is governing from an essentially traditional Labour 'soft left' position, parked firmly in the party's comfort zone.
Key questions need to be addressed: Are we prioritising economic growth if policies restrict it? Does the economy need clean energy or cheap energy now? How do we justify adding to the welfare bill when taxes are high and defence spending must increase? And are we meeting the challenge of the 21st-century industrial revolution, with its opportunities and existential dangers?
Trying to force the prime minister out before knowing what policy direction to take is not serious. The debate between a 'modernising' wing advocating rejoining the EU and equalising capital gains and income tax, and a left position moving further left on taxes, spending and welfare, risks repeating the delusion that losing seats to the right signals a desire for Labour to move left.
