Miliband speech shows a leader without a message
Ed Miliband (Photo: Daily Mirror) |
Calculating that he needed to assert his leadership in the wake of
reports showing that large numbers of traditional Labour supports are
likely to vote Yes, Miliband sought to appeal to his party’s core
voters, urging them to reject the prospect of independence.
What
was immediately noticeable was Miliband’s emphasis on social justice, a theme that
has been somewhat lacking in a debate often focused on the currency
question, the EU or the politics of personality. For this – and this
alone – his contribution should be welcomed. The independence issue is
not a mundane question of economics, but has an inescapable human
dimension, and Miliband was absolutely correct to place social justice
right at the top of his personal priorities. He was also right in calling to
end the “Bedroom Tax”, although quite why a No vote would be the surest
way of accomplishing this he didn’t say.
But
the prominence afforded to social justice matters is virtually the only
positive to take from a speech that, for all its dramatic assertions of
the value of a No vote, utterly failed to convince. Furthermore, the
speech underlines Miliband’s inability to look to the future, confirming
his understanding of his party’s identity as being anti-Tory and a
natural party of government without providing any kind of progressive
vision.
His
appeal was unimaginative, and starkly confirmed how little he appreciates
the reasons behind the decisions of many Labour supporters to break ranks from
the party on independence. Turning on the Tories is guaranteed to bring
applause among tribal Labourites – but when they are partners in the Better
Together campaign is it wise to oppose your colleagues rather than your
opposition? Assuming that normally Labour-sympathetic Scots may be
voting Yes purely from the perspective of preventing future Conservative
governments ruling Scotland, Miliband resorted to the partisan approach
- “If you want real change, if you want a change from this Tory
Government, the way to do it, is to vote No and then elect a Labour
Government which I believe is going to happen.”
And
that, in a nutshell was his message. It wasn’t so much a reason not to
vote Yes, but a call to reinforce the stale binary politics of what
passes for Westminster parliamentary democracy. Basically, he was
arguing that there is one way forward for Scotland – and that is to vote
Labour at every General Election. The message was so glib, so shallow
and so patronising that critique is hardly relevant. The reality that,
even if all 59 Scottish constituencies returned Labour MPs, Scotland’s
bearing on the wider UK result will always be limited seems not to
trouble Miliband’s thinking. Neither does he appreciate the various and
numerous reasons why many who vote for Labour at General Elections are
opting not to listen to the leadership in relation to independence – to
suggest that this is exclusively, or even primarily, an act of defying
Toryism is wide of the mark.
“People’s
antipathy to the Tories is very strong here in Scotland”, Miliband
stated, as if it was a new discovery. Indeed it is. However, he would be
better advised to reflect on Labour’s current position in Scotland and
consider the reasons behind the stunning collapse of support for his
party in 2011, and Johann Lamont’s inability to transform Scottish
Labour into anything like an efficient campaigning unit.
For
party members who believe that voting Labour is the ultimate answer to
every question, the speech will have been well-received. But it is not
these people that Miliband needs to convince. The truth is that while
many will vote for parties at elections for such tactical reasons as
preventing a potential Conservative victory, this referendum is not
about party loyalty or tribal affiliation – no matter how much Miliband
wishes it was. And there are many people who may have been happy to
ordinarily vote Labour but in recent years have seen little on the
policy front to convince them that Labour is standing up for their
interests.
This
was an opportunity for Miliband to project his vision – for both
Scotland and his party. He could have chosen to take up the social
justice theme more comprehensively and put forward a progressive
programme of reform. He could have discussed his own preferences for
political and constitutional reform following a No vote (if you’re going
to break ranks from Better Together, you might as well provide some
substance). But instead he opted to suggest that his vision for Scotland
was simply to be a means of providing Labour MPs for Westminster, while
his view of his party was as a vehicle for keeping the Tories from
power. Miliband is grossly misjudging grassroots Labour activists if he
believes they desire nothing more than the pursuit of power at the
expense of the Tories: has he no recollection of the Blair years?
Rather than deliver a case for the Union - or even a case for voting No, as they are not necessarily inclusive of each other - all Miliband succeeded in doing was to suggest that Labour continues to take Scottish voters for granted. Arguably more worryingly, in pointing to a Westminster Labour government as the the answer to the Scottish Question - whatever that question is - the Labour leader has reinforced the notion of Holyrood being a second-order interest. Scottish voters, more social democratic by inclination than their English counterparts, are important only to facilitate a Labour government of the UK. Labour's self-confessed complacent reliance on Scottish voters - voters who have in recent years showed an unexpected independence of thought - is not an argument for anything other than for overdue reform of the democratic system. Perhaps Miliband's most serious error of judgement is to assume that those he is attempting to reach out to want a Labour government in Westminster as badly as he does.
In any analysis, his speech fell far short of providing any kind of satisfactory answer as to why those who value social justice should vote No. I would also suggest it asked the question “what is the point of the Labour Party in Scotland?” without providing any kind of answers – or indeed insights into the kind of post-referendum Scotland Labour would like to create.
In any analysis, his speech fell far short of providing any kind of satisfactory answer as to why those who value social justice should vote No. I would also suggest it asked the question “what is the point of the Labour Party in Scotland?” without providing any kind of answers – or indeed insights into the kind of post-referendum Scotland Labour would like to create.
Miliband
looks increasingly like a leader without a message. It may only be a
matter of time before he is a leader without a party.
Comments