FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Coming British Elections

by BINOY KAMPMARK

What are we to make of Nick Clegg who now holds the banner of the Liberal Democrats in Britain?  The historian Max Hastings in The Daily Mail (Apr 28) is dismissive.  ‘It would be foolish to expect honesty from Nick Clegg and his party,’ he suggests, as they will only hope to force ‘proportional representation on whichever party is willing to cut a deal with them.’  The major political parties have suddenly realised that Clegg has become an unavoidable force in British politics, a potential spoiler of the balance of power in a country that, Benjamin Disraeli claimed, had no love for coalitions.  A clue is gathered, at least from Labour, in the opinions of the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband.  Reaction towards Clegg is based on a form of ‘anti-politics’, a sweet, relieving meal for those impoverished by corrupt, and dull politics.

The attack is orthodox, tried, and worn: anti-politics, Milliband wants to assure the electorate, is no substitute for government policy.  ‘Anti-politics is fine for opposition, but it is not sufficient for government.  There is a market for anti-politics, due to the sickening expenses scandal, but it is not a basis for running a country’ (Guardian, Apr 23).  Stay warming the benches of the opposition, rather than the seats of government, suggest the very political Milliband.

Cameron has made similar remarks – that Clegg is in danger of promoting a ‘holier than thou’ attitude, the saint whose halo shines with idealistic authority in the House of Commons.  Politics is a grubby business, and cleanliness is hardly desirable in this field.  Clegg is, without doubt, gathering steam for the very reason that he comes with a certain squeaky clean disposition, however disingenuous it might actually be.

Labour’s position on this has been a touch more fluid, despite a firming up of positions heading into the final days of the election. Lord Adonis was even complimentary in parts, paying tribute to the Clegg factor and similarities between the parties. Such flattery is presumably meant to get the beleaguered Labour party some leverage when it comes to forming that most unusual creature of British politics: a coalition.   That potential reality cannot be dismissed.  Labour is now falling behind in the three-cornered contest, finding itself languishing in third place in various polls.  The political exterminator is being readied to sweep the party that was brought into office under the leadership of Tony Blair in 1997.

Voters are also given a paternalistic warning: don’t be ‘tactical’ about preferences. Don’t make protest votes to punish otherwise favoured parties who have strayed from their allotted grounds.  From Labour’s perspective, the tactical vote might spell doom for them, given the tight contest in some 100 key Tory-Labour marginals.  But the Tories will be concerned that those ‘Essex voters’ – the political force of the ‘Basildon man’, will actually return to them as they did to Margaret Thatcher during the 1980s.  And the numbers in this group of low-earning workers are a formidable force: some 14 million, many in households with total incomes of £27,000.  Polling by the Resolution Foundation has found a 11-point lead in favour of the Lib Dems amongst voters in that group (The Independent, Apr 28), a development that may critically impair Cameron’s chances for a secure victory.

The true winner in the last stages of this curious election battle will be Clegg, who has managed in recent times, and certainly in the debates, to look more telegenic and exploit the power, with all its frivolousness and guile, of the camera.   Voters, for so long disappointed, are now waiting to be astonished again.  Cameron’s charm, as former leader of the Liberal Democrats, Lord Ashdown, suggested, was duly ‘leached away’ to Clegg before British television sets.  At times, both Cameron and Prime Minister Gordon Brown seemed bemused, even stunned by their more energetic opponent.  Clegg is making yards on the issue of fairness.  Direct elections to the House of Lords is desired.  Tax reform is required. Inequalities have to be righted.  Political spending, and spending by politicians, has to be scrutinised.

In truth, there is not much separating the parties – other than Clegg.  Whether Cameron is able to net those Basildon men will be something Tories will be fearful off.  What will be even more worrying will be what the winner inherits: the onerous task, the institute of Fiscal Studies has suggested, of making the deepest public spending cuts in 30 years.  On that score, all the leaders have been, and continue to be, reticent.

BINOY KAMPMARK was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

WORDS THAT STICK

 

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
April 28, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Slandering Populism: a Chilling Media Habit
Andrew Levine
Why I Fear and Loathe Trump Even More Now Than On Election Day
Jeffrey St. Clair
Mountain of Tears: the Vanishing Glaciers of the Pacific Northwest
Philippe Marlière
The Neoliberal or the Fascist? What Should French Progressives Do?
Conn Hallinan
America’s New Nuclear Missile Endangers the World
Peter Linebaugh
Omnia Sunt Communia: May Day 2017
Vijay Prashad
Reckless in the White House
Brian Cloughley
Who Benefits From Prolonged Warfare?
Kathy Kelly
The Shame of Killing Innocent People
Ron Jacobs
Hate Speech as Free Speech: How Does That Work, Exactly?
Andre Vltchek
Middle Eastern Surgeon Speaks About “Ecology of War”
Matt Rubenstein
Which Witch Hunt? Liberal Disanalogies
Sami Awad - Yoav Litvin - Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb
Never Give Up: Nonviolent Civilian Resistance, Healing and Active Hope in the Holyland
Pete Dolack
Tribunal Finds Monsanto an Abuser of Human Rights and Environment
Christopher Ketcham
The Coyote Hunt
Mike Whitney
Putin’s New World Order
Ramzy Baroud
Palestinian, Jewish Voices Must Jointly Challenge Israel’s Past
Ralph Nader
Trump’s 100 Days of Rage and Rapacity
Harvey Wasserman
Marine Le Pen Is a Fascist—Not a ‘Right-Wing Populist,’ Which Is a Contradiction in Terms
William Hawes
World War Whatever
John Stanton
War With North Korea: No Joke
Jim Goodman
NAFTA Needs to be Replaced, Not Renegotiated
Murray Dobbin
What is the Antidote to Trumpism?
Louis Proyect
Left Power in an Age of Capitalist Decay
Medea Benjamin
Women Beware: Saudi Arabia Charged with Shaping Global Standards for Women’s Equality
Rev. William Alberts
Selling Spiritual Care
Peter Lee
Invasion of the Pretty People, Kamala Harris Edition
Cal Winslow
A Special Obscenity: “Guernica” Today
Binoy Kampmark
Turkey’s Kurdish Agenda
Guillermo R. Gil
The Senator Visits Río Piedras
Jeff Mackler
Mumia Abu-Jamal Fights for a New Trial and Freedom 
Cesar Chelala
The Responsibility of Rich Countries in Yemen’s Crisis
Leslie Watson Malachi
Women’s Health is on the Chopping Block, Again
Basav Sen
The Coal Industry is a Job Killer
Judith Bello
Rojava, a Popular Imperial Project
Robert Koehler
A Public Plan for Peace
Sam Pizzigati
The Insider Who Blew the Whistle on Corporate Greed
Nyla Ali Khan
There Has to be a Way Out of the Labyrinth
Michael J. Sainato
Trump Scales Back Antiquities Act, Which Helped to Create National Parks
Stu Harrison
Under Duterte, Filipino Youth Struggle for Real Change
Martin Billheimer
Balm for Goat’s Milk
Stephen Martin
Spooky Cookies and Algorithmic Steps Dystopian
Michael Doliner
Thank You Note
Charles R. Larson
Review: Gregor Hens’ “Nicotine”
David Yearsley
Handel’s Executioner
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail