With the votes counted and the dust settling, Andy
Burnham won yesterday’s Makerfield by-election by a large majority. To what
extent this was a personal vote for the man rather than the party (‘vote Labour
to get the Labour PM out’ is an unusual campaign strategy, to say the least) is
not clear. I’ve always tended to the view that personalities don’t have a huge
impact on election results at parliamentary level, but all rules have their
exceptions and the circumstances and extent of coverage in this case may have
enhanced the impact of the individual. If individuals really do make a difference,
then it certainly helped that Reform Ltd chose a walking car-crash as their
candidate, a man whose past comments made him an easy target. A cynic might
even suggest that Farage would prefer Labour to stick with Starmer. Whatever,
the fact is that Burnham is now in Westminster, and expectations are high that
the starting gun will soon be fired on either a Labour leadership contest or
else a coronation for the man from Manchester. Whatever gloss attaches to the
Burnham name now may well be tarnished by the forthcoming mayoral by-election,
which Reform Ltd have a reasonable chance of winning based on the local council
elections, even if the bookies
currently narrowly favour Labour; but maybe he’ll have staged his coup before
that can happen.
The media are painting the Burnham bandwagon as a virtually
unstoppable force, ushering in a new government and a new era. I’m not so sure.
Burnham is undoubtedly a better communicator than the incumbent, although that
isn’t exactly a high bar. The question is about how different he will be in
practice. On that score, the omens are not good. He has already committed to
maintaining the arbitrary fiscal rules drawn up by Rachel Reeves, and the appointment
of a set of deeply conservative financial advisers to support him augurs badly.
It looks as though the neoliberal agenda of continued wealth concentration is
likely to continue unabated, and he is tying his own hands to do little more
than tinker at the edges. Those sunlit uplands aren’t getting any closer. Burnham
vs Starmer is politics as ice cream flavours, except the choice is limited to
different brands of vanilla.
To my mind, the more significant, not to say
worrying, by-election result yesterday was the one in Aberdeen South,
where the SNP lost a seat to the Tories. The significance isn’t in the SNP
losing, although that’s unwelcome, or even in the Tories winning, although that
goes against the run of play. It is, rather, in the basis of the political
upset, which is all about the oil and gas industry. It’s an issue that the SNP
have not handled particularly well, but the outcome suggests that voters in
Aberdeen have fallen for the snake oil being peddled by the Tories (as well as
other parties of the ‘right’), namely the idea that we can both secure the
planet’s future for coming generations and at the same time use all available
resources with no concern for tomorrow. It isn’t just a problem in Aberdeen.
Those who would deny the evidence of anthropogenic climate change have seen an
opportunity to persuade voters to support them: after all, what’s not to like
about a politician who tells you that you can do what you like today and you don’t
need to worry about future consequences? Aided by a dumbed-down and lazy media
which reports the debate as a “he said, she said” question rather than seeking
out facts and scientific consensus, alongside echo-chamber social media, they
are pushing against an open door.
Perhaps our end will come not with a bang or indeed any
type of sudden event, but in the fug of a long drawn-out party.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment