The current mood among Labour MPs nowadays echoes Edgar's law. It affirms that the scale of any misfortune is solely gauged in comparison to yet-to-come catastrophes. As the playwright has the exiled child of the visionless lord state within the tragedy: “The worst does not exist, so long as we are able to utter ‘this represents the lowest point’.”
A Succession of Deepening Difficulties
As per this principle, there exists no public opinion measure so pessimistic for Labour that won't be coming after a subsequent worse one; no fiscal forecast so poor that the exchequer won't exacerbate it with mixed indications on tax; no doubts concerning the Prime Minister that won't be heightened through malicious leaks concerning a bid for power.
Asylum Policy Announcement
In that context, this week's announcement of plans intending to reduce the amount of asylum seekers granted entry to the United Kingdom, based upon a famously strict Scandinavian model, went down better with Labour MPs than anticipated. There were sparks of parliamentary discontent yet no wildfire of opposition.
Tightening asylum rules is not the party's natural territory, yet the existing framework is evidently broken and voters are angry. Numerous parliamentarians comprehend the argument that acceptance and social unity are more readily developed if assurance exists that the nation's borders are safely guarded.
Rising Unhappiness
Reserved MP positions may also represent ominous. MPs have learned that all matters are debatable alongside a purposeless head with flexible principles. Current proclamations may be unannounced tomorrow. There's no requirement to advance hastily if successes can be achieved by attrition.
A frequent grievance is that Starmer is scarcely operating the government at all, following the transfer of political judgment to his chief of staff. This doesn't imply the leader is without administrative energy, he just prefers to refrain from intervening in departmental disputes or engage in extended discussions.
Leadership Style
Starmer came to political parties during later professional life, originally joining the legislature during his early fifties. He has no feel regarding party traditions – the body of past debates, campaigns, characters and social allusions that bind a head to the wider movement and its perception of collective mission.
His most personal values remain unknown including to ministers. As one senior representative explains: “Keir is highly unusual in his role in giving the impression that his individual beliefs are not for public consumption.”
Electoral Repercussions
The persona marketed as the Prime Minister during the previous electoral contest has similarly not produced its purported benefits: managerial competence resulting in countrywide revitalization. If Britain still had a two-party system, the memory of how bad things were under the Tories could extend tolerance for the party.
It indicates a massacre of Labour candidates in municipal and national assembly contests in the coming spring. It shall represent a time of great danger for the Prime Minister, provided he remains that long.
Leadership Questions
Missing from these evaluations is agreement regarding the person of a successor and their proposed policies could vary with existing administration plans. This flaw in the transition plan is mentioned by those backing the incumbent among numerous justifications to stick with the current leader.
Even as unhappy parliamentarians could hesitate regarding these alerts, they similarly perceive in them the recognizable, meaningless sound of low ambition that creates despondency with current conditions. It signifies the tone of inability to define Starmerism as simply a series of strategies for holding power.
Concluding Thoughts
It proves difficult to generate allegiance for such an objective. Numerous parliamentarians have tried. They have adhered to established policies, defended it on the doorstep, obeyed the whips, accepted guarantees that their worries were considered.
Regicide is fraught with risk, but is it riskier than pretending that the present leader has answers regarding major issues which he doesn't identify? Edgar's law recommends carefulness when removing a sitting prime minister. The replacement could always be worse.
“The burden of this sad time we must obey; Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say.”
