‘Nations stumble upon establishments, which are indeed the result of human action,
but not the execution of any human design.’
Adam Ferguson, An Essay on the History of Civil Society (1767)
Showing posts with label Labour Party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Labour Party. Show all posts

22 February 2019

On the Record | Brexit Backers Need to Seize the Moment

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Brexit Backers Need to Seize the Moment’:

Consequences be damned. With the departure date of March 29 inching ever closer — but 35 days in the future — opponents of Britain’s independence are resorting to drastic measures to stop Brexit. This week, eight Labor MPs resigned the party whips; three Conservative MPs followed, forming an “Independent Group” in Parliament. So why are the paladins of Britain’s freedom blunting their message for independence?

The erstwhile Labor MPs resigned due to dissatisfaction with its leadership. They charge that Jeremy Corbyn is negligent in his duties toward moderate colleagues confronting hostile work environments in Westminster and their constituencies; these beleaguered moderates face deselection at election time. Moreover, they claim a culture of anti-Semitism has taken root in the party since Mr. Corbyn’s time at the helm.

Plus, disgust with Labor policy toward Brexit rankles these party defectors.

As for the Conservatives rebels, their gripes against Prime Minister May include the rise of hard-right Tories within the Party (namely Jacob Rees-Mogg’s European Research Group), their own unease over deselection rumors, and the perceived move away from “One Nation Tory” initiatives.

With respect to Labor Party internal discontent, it’s hard to gainsay that there exists reasonable cause for unhappiness. Better to focus instead on the Tory brief. Stated simply, it is disingenuous to suggest that the ERG has “taken over” the Party, given that it could neither cashier Mrs. May, which it tried in December’s leadership challenge, nor give “WTO Brexit” the prominence it deserves.

Also disingenuous are complaints that Mrs. May has backtracked on the spirit, if falling short of realizing specifics, of the most interventionist party manifesto in recent history. As for umbrage that MPs may be challenged in constituency contests for lukewarm support of party ideology, doesn’t the membership deserve candidates who serve them as partisans in Parliament?

Read more . . .

Remarks are welcome on DMI’s Facebook page.

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

25 September 2018

On the Record | Brexit: A Hostage to Fortune

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Brexit: A Hostage to Fortune’:

“Insanity,” according to conventional wisdom, “is doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different outcome.” Britain’s prime minister is coming dangerously close to fulfilling this charge. The Times of London reports “contingency planning for a snap election” this autumn, to save Theresa May’s job and her Brexit proposal after being effectively snubbed by Brussels.

Mrs. May continues to extol the benefits of Chequers, her party’s program for future relations with the European Union once Britain exits. She’s persisting even though both Leavers and Remainers trashed its half-in/half-out provisions. Only when her EU counterparts reiterated that its provisions were unacceptable, has she contemplated — perhaps — a Chequers redo.

Rumors are swirling around Downing Street that, in the face of factions at home and recalcitrance abroad, the Prime Minister will appeal to voters to strengthen her mandate. It would be a “Hail Mary pass” to unite Tories behind her Brexit strategy and convince Brussels that Britain means business.

Haven’t we seen this brainstorm before?

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

12 September 2018

On the Record | What Would Disraeli Do?

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘What Would Disraeli Do?’:

What would Benjamin Disraeli do? And what would Britain’s great 19th-century Conservative prime minister, born in the Jewish faith, say to Frank Field, the veteran member of Parliament who resigned the Labor whip prior to the autumn session, over the issue of anti-Semitism? Mr. Field warned his fellow Labor members: “We are increasingly seen as a racist party.”

It’s impossible to imagine Disraeli would have failed to address the anti-Semitism. One biographer calls him a lifelong booster of “one of the oldest races in the world.” Dizzy (as he was popularly known) boasted that a Jewish civilization was thriving when “the inhabitants of England were going half-naked and eating acorns.”

He would understand, too, that a fish rots from the head. So no doubt Disraeli would place much of the blame for the corruption of Labor with its leader. He would not be fooled by Jeremy Corbyn’s attempt to characterize his views as a quarrel with Israel.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

17 June 2017

On the Record | With the Tories in disarray editor George Osborne starts feeling his oats

Please see my latest wire — and first as Brexit diarist — for The New York Sun, ‘ With the Tories in disarray editor George Osborne starts feeling his oats’:

The editor of London’s Evening Standard is feeling his oats. George Osborne was Chancellor of the Exchequer until last June’s Brexit referendum, when prime minister David Cameron left office after his support for the “Remain” campaign. When Theresa May acceded to the leadership, Mr. Osborne felt the bristles of the new broom.

Mr. Osborne landed the Standard editorship last month, and promptly started using his new perch to cast aspersions upon the Conservative Government of which he had once been a central figure. Last week, in the wake of Mrs. May’s humiliation at the polls, Mr. Osborne called her a “dead woman walking.” His latest is an editorial arguing that “this is no time to ditch fiscal responsibility.”

You don’t say. When Mr. Cameron came to power at the head of a coalition government in 2010, his Treasury officials found a letter left them by the outgoing Labor chief secretary, Liam Byrne: “I’m afraid there is no money.” Seven years on — two with a majority Conservative government — there still isn’t any money.

Fiscal hawks will lament that the British deficit and debt are, respectively, a staggering £50 billion and £1,700 billion. Even with the wind at its back, the Tory government failed to do little more than slow the growth of government and hope that better economic conditions — investment, entrepreneurship, and growth — would swell Treasury coffers. The deficit declines accordingly, but the debt continues its upward climb.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

12 June 2017

On the Record | Britain Ripe for Collective Government by ‘Ministry of All the Talents’

Please see my latest wire for The New York Sun, ‘ Britain Appears to Be Ripe for Collective Government by “Ministry of All the Talents” ’:

Though Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn is one of the few major figures in British politics publically calling for Theresa May to stand down from her premiership, the sentiment is rampant in Conservative constituencies and Establishment enclaves across Great Britain. The Prime Minister’s electoral gamble of trying to backfoot Mr. Corbyn’s troubled tenure, and increase her parliamentary majority, failed spectacularly.

To remain in power as leader of a minority party, Mrs. May must seek an agreement of “confidence and supply” — supply meaning spending — with Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionists. The former Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, who was cashiered in July and edits the Evening Standard, calls Mrs. May a “dead woman walking.”

For all intents and purposes, the Prime Minister leads a caretaker government, awaiting a new head and new direction. Already rumors swirl that the Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, once her opponent for leadership, has been approached by five ministerial colleagues to stand against Mrs. May. While there may be little love in the country for the beleaguered Tory chief who shared scant authority with her colleagues, there is less appetite among Conservatives for the wounds that would be inflicted by a contest for the top job.

Particularly not with Brexit negotiations scheduled to begin in less than a fortnight (European Union officials will be merciless in exploiting Britain’s divisions to win concessions that undermine the determination of last June’s referendum). Mr. Corbyn’s rejuvenated Labor MPs will be salivating for any opportunity to assume government.

But there is an alternative to the choice of glumly following the maladroit Mrs. May or risking all on the vagaries of a leadership race. Simply turn the Prime Minister from a political liability into a benign figurehead for cabinet rule.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

08 June 2017

On the Record | Tories’ Muddled Approach to British Independence Costs UK Its Compass

Please see my latest wire for The New York Sun, ‘Tories’ Muddled Approach to British Independence Costs UK Its Compass’:

Not for the first time, Britons go to the polls with the European Union the unseen ballot question.

In 2013 David Cameron promised fractious Conservative members of parliament, chaffing under a coalition government, that a referendum on remaining within the European Union would be put before the people. Then it was the Brexit vote itself, with a majority of Britons voting for independence.

Now, with a general election tomorrow, the question revolves around who will steer negotiations: Theresa May’s Tories or Jeremy Corbyn’s Labor party?

For the Brexit purist, neither choice is satisfying. Mrs. May hadn’t campaigned for Brexit last year and, while she has said that “Brexit means Brexit,” the government’s opening gambit has been to accept minor concessions that belie the determination of Britain’s bid for sovereignty, whether, say, paying to participate in the single market and customs union or converting existing EU law to UK law.

As for Labor, while it has mouthed platitudes about respecting the Brexit referendum, its composition of loose variables — from those die-hard statist Europhiles to those who want a second referendum vote — leave much to be desired, as demonstrated by its approach to the EU: placate Europe for access to its markets, enshrine workers’ rights into law without corresponding care for the rights of entrepreneurial capital, and outright rejection of the Tory position that “no deal is better than a bad deal.”

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.