The existing sentiment among parliamentary Labour members nowadays follows Edgar's law. It affirms that the scale of every hardship is only assessed against yet-to-come catastrophes. As the playwright lets the exiled child of the sightless nobleman of Gloucester say in King Lear: “The direst is not, provided that we can say ‘this is the worst’.”
A Series of Deepening Difficulties
As per this principle, you won't find any survey so gloomy about the government that won't be followed by another more depressing; no budget prediction so bad that the finance ministry cannot worsen via mixed indications on tax; no doubts regarding the leader that cannot be intensified by malevolent briefing regarding a contest for leadership.
Refugee Measures Revelation
In that context, the latest revelation of strategies designed to limit the number of refugees allowed into the UK, patterned after an infamously harsh Scandinavian model, went down less badly with Labour MPs than might have been expected. There appeared glimmers of backbench anger but no conflagration of opposition.
Tightening asylum rules is far from Labour's comfort zone, but the current system is obviously flawed while citizens are furious. Most MPs understand the argument that tolerance and social unity are simpler to foster provided there is trust that national frontiers are safely guarded.
Growing Discontent
Silent parliamentary rows may also represent threatening. MPs have learned that each issue is discussable under an aimless chief with flexible principles. Current proclamations might be reversed shortly. There's no requirement to advance hastily when victories can be won through persistence.
A common complaint concerns the Prime Minister is scarcely operating the cabinet whatsoever, after assigning political judgment to his top aide. This doesn't imply the head of government lacks executive dynamism, he simply favors to avoid arbitrating among agency disagreements or engage in extended discussions.
Leadership Style
The leader joined political parties during later professional life, initially becoming an MP during his early fifties. He has no feel for Labour lore – the canon of historical arguments, drives, personalities and cultural references that bind a head to the larger group and its feeling of shared purpose.
His innermost beliefs are a mystery to government members. Per a high-ranking representative explains: “The Prime Minister is quite different as a prime minister through suggesting that his individual beliefs are not for public consumption.”
Electoral Repercussions
The image presented representing the leader in the recent polling battle has also not delivered its claimed rewards: administrative capability resulting in national renewal. If Britain still had a binary political arrangement, the remembrance of past problems during Conservative rule could extend patience with Labour.
That presages a massacre among government contenders during local and devolved elections in the coming spring. It shall represent a moment of extreme peril for the leader, provided he remains that long.
Succession Concerns
Not present within these calculations exists consensus concerning the individual of a successor and how their programme may differ with existing administration plans. This defect in the transition plan is cited by the prime minister's defenders as part of various arguments to continue supporting the current leader.
Although discontented representatives might recoil from these alerts, they also hear through them the well-known, empty ringing of limited aspiration that creates despondency with current conditions. It is the sound of failure to characterize the leadership as merely a sequence of tactics for maintaining position.
Ending Reflections
It remains challenging to generate allegiance for such an objective. The majority of representatives have tried. They have adhered to official positions, justified it to constituents, followed party discipline, accepted guarantees that their worries were considered.
Leadership removal involves significant danger, however, does it present greater hazards than pretending that the present leader holds responses to big questions which he doesn't identify? The Shakespearean principle recommends carefulness in ousting an incumbent leader. The alternative may turn out poorer.
“The weight of these difficult days we have to accept; State true sentiments, rather than expected statements.”
