Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

UK green party is really a pressure group rather than a real party. They provide criticisms rather than potential solutions. Which is fair enough, but I will never vote for them for that very reason, despite being at least mid green myself.

Yeah. They don't matter in themselves but I think they reflect a strand of opinion on the left. It's one of my slight worries with Labour that this is the big issue for them and Ed Miliband particularly.

My concern is the extent to which they're prepared for or willing to disappoint Green-ish and Guardian-ish opinion which they need to in order to meet their goals - and it's going to be a fight. Starmer's ruthless which is maybe a little reassuring but I think it's going to be one of the big challenges and I'm not sold on Miliband who I think is always a little too comfortable.

[Josquius]

Worth noting the Greens are running nationally now. Go back before 2019 and this wasn't necessarily the case.
Thats a good 3%+ of Labour's vote taken.
Tin foil hatty but I semi-suspect last election the Tories were behind many of these candidates. They won several seats my such a margin that the Green vote made the difference.

I wonder whether directly pointing out the Greens aren't very Green could help Labour? Its energy and capital better spent on the Tories most likely. But still. I've found a lot of Green voting people don't really know what they stand for. They think they actually are the pro-environment party as they are in much of Europe.

[Sheilbh]

Worth noting the Greens are running nationally now. Go back before 2019 and this wasn't necessarily the case.
Thats a good 3%+ of Labour's vote taken.

The biggest run for the Greens was in 2015 - but you're right that it has increased since then so they're now routinely running something like 450-550 candidates at national elections.

Given their success in local elections I suspect that'll increase too.

Tin foil hatty but I semi-suspect last election the Tories were behind many of these candidates. They won several seats my such a margin that the Green vote made the difference.

I don't think the Greens are a Tory plot. I think the Green vote maybe made the difference in about 20-30 seats. But that's split across Labour, SNP, Tory and Lib Dem holds or gains - which I think captures something. The Green vote wouldn't consistently just go to Labour. There are Tory-Green swing voters, the area the Greens do best in the country is the South-East where I imagine many of their supporters would never vote Labour (particularly under Corbyn) and I think, ultimately, they're a protest party in most of the country. They're a way to express opposition to the Tories without actually voting in a way that would make them lose.

A bit like the Lib Dems under New Labour - but those voters weren't just missing Labour voters, many of them post 2015 ended up voting Tory.

I wonder whether directly pointing out the Greens aren't very Green could help Labour? Its energy and capital better spent on the Tories most likely. But still. I've found a lot of Green voting people don't really know what they stand for. They think they actually are the pro-environment party as they are in much of Europe.

I don't think it's relevant because of the Greens themselves - they're not an electoral force. I wonder if maybe they should position themselves as a bit FDR-ish. Saying they will take action and in an environmental crisis promise "bold, persistent experimentation", rather than specifically that they're more green than the Greens because I think that's a hostage to fortune but also I think the Greens own the issue because of branding.

But I think it's indicative of the fact that for Labour to actually achieve energy transition and get to net zero is going to require disappointing and angering lots of people who should support that goal and maybe should support Labour. They're going to need to disappoint Polly Toynbee and enrage George Monbiot to do any good. Admittedly this may just line up with my general blood on the carpet view that generally governments that are willing to take on their own side are successful while ones that become hostage to it fail - and that, in general, the public like it. Again, Ed Miliband isn't the guy I'd have to lead that department - although I'm fully aware that he is incredibly passionate and well-informed on it.

I also think it is wider problem that there are lots of issues that are bracketed under green politics: biodiversity, preservation of ancient woodlands, nutrient neutrality. And there's an awful lots of assessments and audits involved to tick all of those boxes. My view is that some of them actively go against what we need to do in order achieve net zero - and also that energy transition and net zero are such priorities and so urgent that we may not be able to do all of those impact assessments and audits. There's no issue where I feel so strongly that we can't let perfect be the enemy of good because every day we're waiting for perfect we're making things worse.

[Josquius]

Lots happening today. Seems HS2 will be scrapped (likely not the big blow to the northern tory vote it should be) and truss forming a group of 60 MPs within the tories.
Amazing how little self awareness that woman has. And the other 60 with her.

And yep. Letting perfect be the enemy of good is a big issue. It all loops back to planning really doesn't it? Fix the laws to allow the (next) government to smash through a sensible building project of transit and associated development.
Piss off some local pensioners in tiny villages but win a new generation of voters.

[Sheilbh]

I think the striking thing on HS2 was Andy Street - the Tory with the single direct electoral mandate and the most important outside of Westminster saying at conference that he's not accepting that decision on HS2 but going to keep pushing.

I think the 60 "growth coalition" doesn't really matter. But on lack of self-awareness, Truss is apparently planning a second run for Tory leader after the election. As a reminder, more Brits think they've seen a UFO than think Truss performed very or fairly well as PM

It's definitely the sign of a party that has already written off the next election and is ready for a period in opposition - there's lots of leadership candidates jostling. On the current polls what may actually be most relevant is which of them still have a seat...

[HVC]

I wonder how many coalition partners the lettuce can get.

[Razgovory]

IIRC Admiral Yi approves of performative cruelty as an effective measure to lessen the number of asylum seekers.

When I was in the marching band, the director told me that me playing the trumpet was "performative cruelty".

[garbon]

Kemi Badenoch as next Tory leader? That would not be such a bad thing for the party

Simon Jenkins

[Sheilbh]

I thought the same to be honest - I think of the leadership contenders that are talked about (her, Braverman and Cleverly) that she would probably be the best pick. But I'll be forced to reconsider this now I'm aware of Sir Simon Jenkins' view

They're all clearly positioning for the leadership, but there's no way of knowing. We don't know how bad the result will be - so what will be the remaining pool of MPs who can nominate candidates etc. But also I think losing an election is kind of traumatic for a political party - especially one that's been in office for over a decade. So I think it can provoke a surprising result, I think very few people in 1996 would have guessed that William Hague would be the next Tory leader.

The other thing is that I think they've all been elected while the Tories have been in government. Opposition's a very different job and people who are suited at one aren't necessarily good at the other - I'm not sure I'd say any of them are natural minister, but I think they've got comfortable in one world (civil service support, ministeral cars, being able to do things and easy access to the media) that will entirely disappear if they lose the election.

[Josquius]

Isn't she the one who is always ranting about woke?
And I mean that by Tory standards...

[Sheilbh]

Isn't she the one who is always ranting about woke?
And I mean that by Tory standards...

I think that's how her candidaacy was described by the press in 2022 and perceived - it wasn't really matched by her actual campaign (Sunak, for example, went in far harder). Her line was far more Gove-ish. And she's Equalities Minister so she is the face of the government on any equalities issue.

But I think that perception will probably stick with her even though I think it'd be a little unfair especially if she's in a line up v Braverman.

[garbon]

Isn't she the one who is always ranting about woke?
And I mean that by Tory standards...

Yes, ignore our torypologist. She is dreadful.

[Admiral Yi]

 

[Sheilbh]

I think of the candidates likely running (with all those caveats), I think she's the one likely to present most of a threat to a Labour government.

Her leadership pitch was, I think, fairly coherent - and pretty critical of Johnson (people have been let down by platitudes and empty rhetoric, he came to symbolise the feeling that nothing was working etc). She also said she wouldn't get into a "bidding war" with, say, Truss on which taxes she wanted to cut because it was cakeism which is what people were tired of after Johnson. That was an unusual pitch in that leadership election when everyone was promising the moon - and especially bold for the most junior candidate. (Edit: Alternately, it's exactly the campaign the most junior candidate has to run to get any attention/have a chance? )

I've mentioned before but she's the one I worry could be the Thatcher to Starmer's Barbara Castle if he doesn't deliver on planning, building and growth.

[garbon]

I think of the candidates likely running (with all those caveats), I think she's the one likely to present most of a threat to a Labour government.

Her leadership pitch was, I think, fairly coherent - and pretty critical of Johnson (people have been let down by platitudes and empty rhetoric, he came to symbolise the feeling that nothing was working etc). She also said she wouldn't get into a "bidding war" with, say, Truss on which taxes she wanted to cut because it was cakeism which is what people were tired of after Johnson. That was an unusual pitch in that leadership election when everyone was promising the moon - and especially bold for the most junior candidate. (Edit: Alternately, it's exactly the campaign the most junior candidate has to run to get any attention/have a chance? )

I've mentioned before but she's the one I worry could be the Thatcher to Starmer's Barbara Castle if he doesn't deliver on planning, building and growth.

I agree she could be a threat but I'd argue that she still would be bad for the party, at least so far as getting the party to be something that is good for Britain.