Do the Tories have a Plan B?
Friday, May 7, 2010 Labour has clearly lost the election but their vote stood up pretty well in the circumstances. In terms of the future, I wouldn't be too unhappy if I was a Labour activist. The party hasn't gone into meltdown like the Tories in 1997 and 2001 and they still have a respectable number of seats.
However Labour cannot move forward with Brown as leader. The question is, does he realise this and, if not, who among his Cabinet colleagues has the bottle to tell him to his face?
One other point. Within minutes of the exit poll being published, Labour seemed to know exactly what their tactics were. Harriet Harman, then Peter Mandelson (who has never made any secret of the fact that he wants to build a centre left alliance), and later David Miliband and others queued up to say that the voting system had to be changed. This was as big a come on to the Lib Dems as you could ever wish to see and it continued all night.
Even when it became clear that we were going to get a hung parliament I didn't hear a clear message from David Cameron or the Conservatives. They must have talked about the prospect of a hung parliament, surely, but from what I saw last you would never have guessed it.
The likes of George Osborne and Theresa May didn't fill me with confidence. Frankly, they seemed to be hoping against hope that the results would take them to magic number of seats (326) and they wouldn't have to come up with a Plan B.
Not good. Not good at all.
Reader Comments (13)
I have been saying for a long time that there would be a hung parliament. Despite the current government having huge economic and foreign policy problems and the Prime Minister being as popular as a fart in a spacesuit, Cameron can only muster a shade over a third of the electorate.
He was the wrong leader for the Tories because he only appeals to the traditional grass root Tories who would have voted for him anyway. He will have no chance of holding that party together in government especially if he jumps straight into bed with the DUP.
Had the Tories been lead by someone like Hague or Clark they would have won as these politicians do have broad appeal. As a result if the Tories do form the next UK government it will mean that outside England they have only 9 MPs so could hardly call themselves a National government.
Almost two thirds of the electorate rejected Cameron's Tory party and policies so the only real solution is a Lib/Lab pact supported by the Nationalist parties as this would be a proper UK wide government.
The Tories do not deserve a Plan B.
"Your" beloved Labour party Michael Peoples, was the party that brought in the smoking ban, the party who took people's freedom away from them, the party who "gave" away our gold reserve, the party who have ruled by devious means ever since they came to power, the party who took us into an illegal war in Iraq, the party who want to take us into the Euro, even though it is failing all over Europe, the party who want even closer integration with the failed experiment that is the EU, the party who rig the polls, the party who let all the immigrants into this country, the party who have failed our schools and our National Health Service, the party who has taken the police off our streets. This is the Labour Party Michael, the party of fear and corruption that you would back in a Lib-Lab pact. These people would make a pact with the devil himself if they thought it would help them keep their lucrative jobs.
The Conservatives last night, won more seats and votes than Tony Blair did in 1995, and you have the audacity to say they do not deserve a plan B.
I don't know about you Michael, but I have children and grandchildren, and after last night's fiasco, I was almost in tears thinking about what the future now holds for them. It was the stinking, corrupt Labour Party that got us into the awful mess we now find ourselves in, and now people like you are saying they should be given another go?
What about us, the people of this country, who voted overwhelmingly to oust this bunch of crooks, don't you think we should be given another chance? What about my children and grandchildren, don't they deserve a chance either?
If Brown has one ounce of decency left in his body, he will resign this morning. IF?
I'd like to see Cameron man up, promise a referendum on electoral reform, sack George Osborne and make Vince Cable Chancellor, and form the Government. Job done.
Peter -
How happy I am to be able to agree with you on all points.
At the risk of being grossly partisan, I have to say that ANYONE who voted Labour last night, AND who claims to be Pro-Liberty, Pro-Humanity, and Pro-Truth either needs to get out more - or see a psychiatrist.
Talk about 'being in denial'.
Those IN FAVOUR of continuing government by foreign bureaucrats, a strengthening of the Police State, the further wastage of blood and treasure in wars-about-oil (and opium - as a sideline), and economic collapse (which will be greatly advanced by the policies of Caroline Lucas' pointy-headed friends) made EXACTLY the right decision.
From my perspective, the LEAST BAD result would be a Lib/Lab coalition, which engaged in a little (relatively) harmless meddling and incompetence for a while, and which eventually fell apart from the stresses of its own internal contradictions - thus necessitating a second election with a more decisive outcome within a year or so.
This would give Cameron (or his successor) the time needed to put together a policy platform that CLEARLY marked them out as A Totally Different Party from the other two, reflecting bold and imaginative ideas that vast numbers of the Electorate could identify with.
A re-visiting, you might say, of Portillo's Clear Blue Water principle.
He might also consider embarking upon a relatively untried political formula that would at least have the effect of energising people: Telling The Public The Truth.
It would admittedly require boldness, courage, clarity of purpose, and a certain originality - to say nothing of a willingness to ditch the fatuous quasi-Blairite agenda of the 'modernisers' that has probably forced countless numbers of otherwise Conservative-minded electors to stay at home (or vote for minority parties).
From a strictly tactical point of view, becoming Prime Minister is the LAST thing any friend of Cameron's would wish upon him now.
In fact, if I were Cameron, I'd probably take up smoking again................
I am not so pro Labour as anti Cameron. I believe the man was so confident of victory against a lame duck prime minister that he took the electorate for a bunch of suckers. People have seen through him. Now that he has made such a mess of the election he should resign as his defeat is much worse than Labour's. To throw away a 22 point lead in less than six months is nothing short of incredible.
I also believe that Brown should resign and either David Milliband or Jack Straw should take over. I also agree with Rose that Vince Cable should be Chancellor and Clegg can be Foreign or Home Secretary.
I too have children, own my own home and pay taxes. However, under Cameron and Osborne I believe that the majority of the people would be much worse off. Tax cuts for multi million pound estates while massive increases in VAT is hardly equitable. These type of policies attack the poorest in society while helping the wealthiest.
Ultimately the electorate were not going to hand the reins to some sort of cross between Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher. They have clearly shown they want a centre left coalition and it is incumbent on Labour, LibDems and the Nationalists to give them what they have voted for.
This will be to the benefit long term as consensus politics will prevent future debacles like the Poll Tax, the Iraq War and further European cession. If this experiment fails there will be another general election soon and maybe the Tories can find themselves an electable leader and not some snob whose only concern is for his foxhunting mates.
"To throw away a 22 point lead in less than six months is nothing short of incredible."
This is very true.
But - given the coterie of dinner-party clever-dicks that Cameron chose as his strategy advisers (I name no names), perhaps not ENTIRELY unpredictable.
Nonetheless, I can't help feeling that all this analysis and speculation is rather like deciding who's going to be the biggest crab in the rock pool - while a tsunami gathers strength just over the horizon.................
(And I speak as a Natural Optimist).
I don't know how many advisors Cameron had as he was too wrapped up in himself and thought he only had to only turn up on election day and someone would hand him the keys to Number 10. At least Brown knew he needed help and brought in Mandelson. Irrespective of anyone's views of him it has to be admitted that without him Labour would be 50 seats less.
Cameron was outplayed by Peter Mandelson which hardly makes him Prime Minister material.
I thought that was a very impressive speech just now by Cameron and I hope Clegg, and the Conservative/Lib Dem rank and file, were listening.
Michael Peoples
You seem to forget something in your rantings. The rich have got richer than EVER BEFORE under New Labour. New Labour have lied about the deficit and how to deal with it which will soon become apparent.
A Tory/LD non-aggression pact enabling DC to take No.10 sounds attractive, but any concession to PR will be dangerous. Also this will be a weak vulnerable government needing to take unpopular decisions; likely to fall at any time through losing a confidence-vote; we could then see Labour come back sans-Gordo after making their own electoral-pact with LDs. This would deliver a nightmare of PR, in which the "progressive" left create for themselves an unassailable built-in majority.
Don't think Clegg will sell a C/LD coalition to the 75% of party-membership he'll need: they're real statist lefties - to the left of the party in parliament. This doesn't rule out something more informal however and this may well happen.
A LibLab coalition will also be very weak... probably weaker than a C/LD, as there won't be the goodwill-factor. If I could be persuaded that this unholy coalition wouldn't be able to proceed with a skewed-in-their-favour PR before they lose a confidence vote, it would be the option I prefer for now, for the simple reason that Labour will then get the blame for the "fix" as well as the problem they've created through their barmy borrowing to pay for diversity officers. The following election, probably within a year, should then see a comfortable Tory majority.
Once they've fixed the postal-voting problem, of course...
Following application of beer, I'm feeling more optimistic...
Don't get me wrong... I do see some benefits as well as pitfalls in PR - especially if, at the same time, the West Lothian Question is answered. Tories got 55% of the vote in England. :-)
Cameron'a all-party commission on electoral-reform sounds a much better deal than any version of PR cooked up by Mandelson.
Gosh Basil - how many beers did you fit in during that hour ;-)
Never let it be said that I can't see both sides... however, it's more normal, post-beer, for my side to get louder.
Good article by Gilligan today.