What to do, what to do? Tolerated in the North and fairly loathed in the South, today’s local election results are confusing for the Tories.
Johnson has torn up the anchor of ‘yesterday’s’ Tories
It is not hard to see why. Nationally, and it is national issues which mostly motivate local election voters, the Tories used to stand for a sort of morality in government, moderation in most things, conservativism with a small ‘c’ as they sought to protect the institutions of state and perhaps, most importantly for many of their core supporters, lower taxes. Of course, all these principles were applied with enough ideological flexibility to win elections.
Not anymore. A government trying to illegally prorogue parliament and regularly challenging the judiciary, a misleading Prime Minister constantly accused of being loose with the truth, bringing amorality to its heart, a party ideologically fixated by Brexit and, finally, applying record tax hikes, is not the party of old. It is a strange picture. Beyond this mix of activity being (in part) a winning combination in 2019, what do the anchorless Tories now stand for?
The answer is not a great deal outside Johnson’s ‘shopping trolley’ populism but, of course, the new Tories in the North don’t care about the Party’s past or, to be honest, its future. Many of the current Tory policies tactically appeal or at least fill the vacuum of a mediocre Labour Party which is perceived not to have delivered historically and does not convince about how it will deliver in the future. Northern/Midlands votes are on loan to today’s government. Brexit has been delivered; all politicians are amorally the same so who can bother about such things as ‘Partygate’. Just get on with the job of ‘meaningfully levelling up’ whatever that means in practice and prove you can alleviate the pressures of a soaring cost of living. The loan of votes to the Tories could be permanent if there is no alternative.
But in the South, many voters were committed to the principles of a pre-Johnson Tory Party and are pretty revolted by what they now see. Often anti-Brexit, pro lower taxes, supporters of the status quo and a certain level of probity in government they thoroughly dislike Johnson’s populist regime. Lucky for Johnson et al that Starmer doesn’t quite convince the South like Blair did in ’97, so the LibDems are key beneficiaries of such disillusionment. Congratulations to them. They have had a strong election but in the medium term the ‘post Nick Clegg’ LibDems must hold the centre-ground to build on this success and one doesn’t sense they really understand this. Today, they still seem only a temporary repository for disillusioned Tory votes but that is a subject for another blog.
And Starmer needs to up his game. He needs to stand more clearly for something. Anything. Piling up votes in the cities, notably London, modest gains elsewhere with a bounce back in Scotland is not enough. A brilliant analysis of what he needs to do has been outlined in Robert Shrimsley’s FT column this week. Required reading for any ambitious Labour supporters.
So, there you have it. Not all the local election results are in as this blog is being written but it seems a partly discredited Johnson has upended traditional support in the South for greater loyalty in the North. Net, net, overall, he has done badly but not badly enough to go. His premiership has torn up the anchor of the ‘old Tory Party’ and leaves its long-term future uncertain, not that he cares. It is a problem for his successor.
Johnson is the beneficiary of only modest gains by Starmer’s Labour Party in the North. Starmer is the beneficiary of disillusioned Tories often in the cities. The LibDems are beneficiaries of Johnson’s more widely disliked populism in the South.
On this basis, Johnson needs Starmer and Starmer needs Johnson. Perhaps LibDem leader, Ed Davey, needs them both. What a choice!
Inside Right Politics 