Warning: this article contains an overuse of the word ‘progressive’, a buzzword that doesn’t buzz.
On 24th September the Independent published a list of The Top 10 most popular zombie bad policies. The list included the usual suspects, rail nationalisation, the death penalty, and so on, but to my consternation Jon Rentoul also included this one.
4. Proportional representation. It’s a matter of opinion, but I think it gives disproportionate power to small parties, and it is not obvious to me that Ireland, Germany or Italy are more democratic, better governed or more engaged with politics than we are.
After all the optimism surrounding the building of a progressive alliance of the left to fight for proportional representation, Rentoul’s put-down suggests that an unwelcome cold wind of reality may be blowing.
Meanwhile, in a galaxy far away, the key party in any such progressive alliance was celebrating Jeremy Corbyn tightening his grip on Labour. And with shadow Culture Secretary Kelvin Hopkins calling for the return of Clause IV, it seems unlikely that Labour could now pass any meaningful test of progressiveness even if Mr Corbyn was prepared to play ball with other parties. The progressive alliance idea of cooperation between Greens, Labour, Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru and the Scottish National Party looks increasingly dead in the water.
So if these signs are correct, there will be no proportional representation to deliver a proportionate number of MPs to support the growth of under-represented parties, and no alliance of the left to deliver an effective opposition. So where does that leave the development of the Liberal Democrats? Here are a couple of suggestions.
Option 1: Business as usual. Do what comes naturally and go it alone, take the long march and build the party organically over several electoral cycles. (That could be more than 10 years, by the way).
Option 2: Step change. Seize the one potentially viable opportunity from the progressive alliance concept and broaden the party’s base by forming an alliance with the Greens. And I’m not just talking about cooperation between two independent parties, potentially this could be a journey towards full merger achieved by developing a more liberal green party and a greener liberal party.
Such a move doesn’t immediately sound like the key to government and comes with obvious risks, but against a backdrop of Labour decline an alliance could establish Lib Dem/Greens as the UK’s undisputed national third-place political force – a great springboard for GE 2020.
One final thought, climate change is upon us regardless of Tory ‘green crap’ denial and in the coming decades will increasingly become a permanent fixture on the political agenda. Outside of the EU and with weakened European-wide action, now is the time to establish UK policy competence and political leadership on climate action in a unified environmentally-focused movement.
* Phil Aisthorpe has been a Lib Dem member since September 2015 having previously been a life-long Labour supporter. In a previous life, Phil worked as an IT planning manager and business strategy manager with a leading UK financial services organisation.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Reform inadvertently lose their majority
The Major Oak is dead and Phil Harding has discovered another ancient site near Stonehenge
Reform own goals
Trumps' White House thuggery appals the world including most Americans
Alex Macfie
Margot Wilson
George Thomas
Chloe
cim
25 Comments
We are already Greener than the Greens; unlike them we don’t reject scientific studies on the subject and our environmental policies aren’t subjugated to a childish view on economics that rejects all possibility of growth.
The Greens have nothing to offer us; in any case they are dying as their core support swings towards Corbyn Labour.
While we must always be committed to pluralism, I wonder what it is that attracts you more to the Greens than to Labour. It would seem that the Greens have pitched to the left of Labour in recent years. They are resolutely anti-business and against market economics and free trade.
I also strongly suspect that whatever some of our members may think about the ‘nice people in the Green party’ (and I’m not saying they aren’t lovely people) an alliance with the Greens would see more than half of our voters running elsewhere.
PR should be a core policy for Lib Dems and we should not keep quiet about it. Rather we should make sure it is included in every top ten list of party policies. No doubts no apologies, no half-heartedness.
In a mature democracy with a confident and educated electorate, it is no surprise that any single manifesto of policies fails to receive 50% of electoral support. Opinions are too diverse. Rather than a single political party with an overarching manifesto able to gather widespread support, small parties better reflect the views of the significant sections of the electorate. Many voters are alienated by the compromises and contradictions of the larger party which is trying to be attractive to at least 50% of the electorate.
The First Past the Post electoral system is swimming hard against this tide. It is very much the parent and child of the two party system, rewarding the large parties while making it extremely difficult for a small party to get its candidates elected, and thus have a proportionate influence over Government or the legislative programme. Our democracy has reached the difficult situation where the electoral system is no longer fit for purpose, but at the same time is the democratic barrier to reform – impasse.
To overcome this difficulty larger parties are of necessity informal coalitions with all the tensions and contradictions of coalitions between different parties. The difference is that the electorate may not get the opportunity to express support for the different wings of a larger party, so that the political intention of the Conservative (or Labour) voter may be easy to misconstrue.
This is damaging to our democracy. It is the root cause of the problems of the Labour Party, which is desperately trying to hold disparate political philosophies together for the sake of being able to compete under the existing electoral system. The Conservative Party is not immune. The European schism is a fundamental fault line within the party and the referendum has not solved anything.
Electoral reform is part of the answer, and for the UK, this means a form of Proportional Representation best suited to the UK, ie one based on the single member constituency.
The second part of the solution is finding a process of forming a coalition, which is both democratic and seen to be democratic, so that the resulting coalition Government does indeed attract majority support, albeit with several parties working together.
Without wishing to speculate on whether a progressive alliance is desirable, possible or dead, I have to say this article is fundamentally flawed on a number of points.
Firstly, a grand coalition between the Liberal Democrats and the five other parties mentioned (there are two wholly separate Green parties in Britain) was never on the cards. Any deal involving both the Scottish Labour Party and the SNP is simply a non-starter. Why on earth would the SNP turkeys vote for Christmas when after sixty years of trying they have finally smashed the Labour Party?
Secondly, I don’t think that the author can have spoken to many Green Party activists. Green Party activists are not a bunch of misguided lost liberals. They are mostly to the left of Jeremy Corbyn. Honestly look at their policies if you don’t believe me.
Finally, the Scottish Green Party, which is a wholly separate party from the Green Party of England and Wales, is absolutely committed to Scottish independence whilst the Liberal Democrats remain a unionist party. I see no prospect of any sort of merger being possible there.
Politicos like us are no use if we allow ourselves to be trapped in the Past/Present, we should be living half in the Future. On that basis I like what this article is trying to do but I dont think it does it very well.
Our strategy is simple in one way, replace Labour as the alternative to the Tories, relegate Labour for now to the Ragbag of fringe Parties.
I accept that could take 10 years but equally it might only take 18 days. Personally I would go for 7 Months, after next Mays Locals.
I think we have tried to play the ‘tactical voting’ card too much. ‘Vote Lib Dem to stop someone else winning’ is not inspiring – we need to promote our own unique selling points – positive reasons to vote for us.
The only option is to focus on building the LibDems back up. That includes persuading people that the LibDems are interesting in listening and may have something to offer which will be a long term project. There are no short cuts you can’t “bank” your current support and then “bank” another parties. Parties don’t “own” their support they have to win it.
There may be opportunistic moves available ahead, but they won’t be predictable and they won’t be based upon assuming you own the voting base you have.
@Alisdair : “We are already Greener than the Greens; unlike them we don’t reject scientific studies on the subject ”
well apart from on fracking where we ignored the advice of the Royal Society that it is safe
Alisdair, you have expressed the very concerns that prompted me to write this article. First, as a party we make much of our green credentials, but I am not sure that the public sees us as the undisputed queen of green. Second, I recently had a bit of a tiff with some in my local party for tweeting that the Greens are looking like a Corbyn fan club. This was seen as being counter-productive. My big fear is that the environmental agenda could increasingly seen to be as a marginal left wing issue, a position reinforced by the Tory ‘green crap’ position. This is dangerous. The green agenda must be dragged back to the centre ground if it is to receive popular support. As a party we need to raise our game to ensure that this happens. I don’t think it helps to write off the Green party as a bunch of brainless lefties, because that damages green politics for us all.
Phil,
we have a commonality of purpose with the Green party is some areas, but the Greens remain (like UKIP) a primarily single issue party i.e. more of a campaigning movement than a broad church political party that can present a credible government in waiting.
There remain three distinctive political ideologies in British Politics – Conservatism, Liberalism and Socialism. Jeremy’s Corbyn’s labour party has shifted back towards its core socialist roots and away from the liberal/social democracy of new labour.
The Conservative Party, in it’s efforts to modernise, has promoted a one-nation conservatism that consistently fails to deliver on its promise of an inclusive political settlement and a more equal society.
I think you are right that any progressive alliance of the left is a tall order. Socialist values (or the dog eat dog values of conservatism), can never sit well with the absolute centrality of individual freedoms in Liberalism.
Conservatives and labour will continue to be locked in an increasingly irrelevant class struggle. It is incumbent on us to develop and offer a pragmatic alternative to this 20th century left/right divide in the form of a Liberal/social democratic construct fit for the 21st Century, that preserves those fundamental values of individual freedom developed by the enlightenment thinkers.
The Green party is proud of being to the left of Labour, anti business, against free trade and for maximum intervention.
Lib Dems are pro business and as Simon McGrath says, we base policies on scientific evidence not anti business ideology.
Lib Dems should not be seen as left or right wing but liberal.
“We are already Greener than the Greens”……. Come off it, Alisdair……..Wasn’t it Sir Edward (formerly plain Ed) Davey who negotiated the appalling Hinckley Point deal ?
As for Joseph’s comment : “we have a commonality of purpose with the Green party in some areas, but the Greens remain (like UKIP) a primarily single issue party i.e. more of a campaigning movement than a broad church political party that can present a credible government in waiting.” …………..Sorry, but I take that with a pinch of salt….to imply the Lib Dems are ” a credible government in waiting.” is pushing it a bit.
As someone who first joined the Liberal Party back in 1961, I find the Green Party’s critique of modern society (try Caroline Lucas’s book) has much more in common with the old Liberal Party stance of the 1960’s. They also appear to be a more coherent party than the modern Lib Dems who (if these posting are any evidence) are split down the middle between radical social liberals and the not so radical economic liberals. Certainly there is plenty of the usual whiff of the knee jerk tabloid anti-Corbynism in some of these postings.
The Greens have no idea how to win elections. I don’t mind a lot of them, but they’re political idealists and we have strived to be a realist party.
I think it’s worth remembering that the stated views of high profile politicians, and the more active party members may differ from those of a large chunk of their voters. How many people that vote Green are fully aware of the full contents of their manifesto?
Personally, I don’t think the leadership of Scottish Greens have much of an environmental pedigree, and seem to be more interested in being ‘alternative’ and reactionary than promoting meaningful environmental policies, but I could be here all night if I expand too much, except to say that an independent Scotland would be, if we are realistic, more heavily reliant on oil than a Scotland within the UK. I accept it’s a long standing philosophy of the Greens to back devolved decision making, but I suspect a certain amount of entryism that led them to decide full independence (within the EU) was a definite policy position.
I’m keen for the Lib Dems to push our environmental credentials, and probably be bolder with some of our policies and accept that protection of the environment means we might have to do without certain things, or pay more for them. However, we also need to be clear that the best way of protecting the environment might be to pick a better technology, rather than shunning it altogether. We need to emphasise evidence based decision making, rather than following fashions.
The SNP definitely do not want an alliance that might interfere with their case for independence. It’s not in their interests for the British parliamentary system to work. They like complaining about how awful it is, and it is their interests for it to remain that way.
Phil, I think your heading is all wrong: there hasn’t been a Progressive Alliance of the Left to die, but some such could live in particular areas. You write about the Labour Party as if there weren’t dozens of despairing non-Socialist Labour MPs wondering how to survive under the Corbyn leadership, who might welcome some company.
At the Brighton Conference there was a useful panel discussion hosted jointly by the local Lib Dems, Brighton and Hove Compass, and the ‘Sussex Progressives’, and featuring Norman Lamb, Caroline Lucas of the Greens and the Hove Labour MP Peter Kyle.
The paper introducing the discussion explained, ‘A Progressive Alliance between the parties of the centre to left could take a number of forms. These range from but are probably not limited to a shared policy platform, with open primaries to pick candidates for a general election; a Progressive Alliance kite mark whereby candidates at the 2020 election could sign up to demonstrate to their electorate a commitment to a core set of priorities, which would include red lines for all the parties involved; to formal or informal non-compete agreements between the parties on a constituency basis, or a mixture of these elements. Fundamentally it is about finding ways for the Progressive parties to work strategically together to advance their common aims, particularly with regard to our flawed electoral systems.’
Absolutely, say I at least – let’s back this idea. With our desperate poll ratings, we Lib Dems could do with its implementation, and I only wish it was already working in the Witney by-election, where we need a Liberal Democrat famous victory to show the rest of the country what people think of this appalling Tory Government past and present.
@ Simon McGrath
As you might remember, I spoke against the fracking motion, not on safety grounds but on the supply & economics grounds that fossil fuels are supposed to be a mature technology and should not therefore be in receipt of subsidies.
@Phil Aisthorpe – You reject any notion of cooperating with Corbyn and his support for Clause IV including public ownership of the railways yet you see The Greens as a possible progressive alliance partner.
You appear to be unaware that public ownership of the railways is the policy of The Green Party too. Whilst I welcome an broad anti-Tory alliance based on common policy issues, I’m not sure what the 8 LibDem MP’s plus one Green MP that you propose will achieve on their own.
It also strikes me as rather arrogant that the LibDems feel that they can pick and chose who they will allow ‘to be in their team’. If the LibDems insisted on the exclusion of Labour, has it occurred to you that perhaps a large proportion of Green supporters would not be so keen on such a LibDem determined ‘limited alliance’ given the LibDems less than progressive flirtation with the Tories in recent years?
Progressive Alliances seem a useful compromise to me while we have the unfair First Past the Post system for Westminster. Here in Herefordshire we have 2 Conservative MPs in ‘safe’ seats, a strong LibDem team in the south, and a Green council in Leominster; so why not do a real upfront deal and have a LibDem MP in the south and a Green in the north. But as I live in the north could I get on my bike and deliver leaflets for our Green ally, or would this break an old rule about supporting our enemies and lead to me being chucked out the party? Is a constitutional amendment needed? Polls will swing wildly before the next general election campaign over the next three years with Corbyn, Brexit recession, and events, before then lets make friends and clear the decks for possible Progressive Alliances
George
Ahh – tribalism is alive and well in the Lib Dems as much as in Labour. If we want to build a centre left social movement, then we should concentrate on that objective, working with others. Of course, it would take 20 years to achieve anything. If we want to move a tad quicker then the only way anyone other than the Tories could win in 2020 is by creating an electoral alliance. Jermy Corbyn can’t win. Neither could any other potential Labour leader. The Lib Dems can’t win, the Greens can’t win etc. Either we work together or accept that the Tories are in for another decade.
PS: I shared this page on facebook and hurrah! instead of the usualy yellow logo it featured the big image from the top of the page – I dont know if you’ve tweaked your code, or facebook have, or what or why, but keep doing whatever it is that makes this work, I feel faebook posts get shared more if they have a good picture with them
[g]
Dave, there is plenty of evidence about that Labour would not be willing to join an alliance so it’s not a question of the LibDems being picky.
http://labourlist.org/2013/08/the-prospect-of-an-alliance-with-the-greens-is-an-unwelcome-one/
http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2016/09/14/the-progressive-alliance-myth/
The alliance with the Greens that I am suggesting would focus on green environmental policy. With the Tories taking their ‘green crap’ stance my fear is that green politics may become the property of the left and therefore unattractive to the electorate.
I’m not bothered by John Rentoul’s comments. His arguments are ancient and there will always be some opponents of PR.
I agree Corbyn’s re-election makes any kind of Labour – Liberal Democrat arrangement this side of the next general election very difficult – not so much because of Corbyn’s policies, but because he’s dependent on Momentum zealots who seem more and more like the Militant Tendency risen again. These people ally only to stab or engulf. In their mental map there is no place for co-operation with people who don’t agree with The Line 100%. By no means all Corbyn supporters are like that, but the zealots will torpedo any broad alliance once they realise they can’t control it.
I can’t see that a full-blown alliance with the Greens would offer us much and it certainly wouldn’t defeat the Tories.
However, I think there is still room not for an electoral pact, but for discussion and limited co-operation among pro-diversity, pro-equality parties. It might bear fruit after Corbynite Labour has lost an election badly.
Why base a crucial discussion about effective democratic government on a “judas goat” piece by a zealous Blairite? [See Wikipedia on Mr Rentoul]
“First past the post” results in unrepresentative oligarchic government.
The Blairites have shown their disregard for democracy in the ways they have treated their members and, like it or not, their decisively democratically elected leader.
All too often oligarchy morphs into plutocracy as may well be the case in the current USA elections.
George, you speak so much sense for me. Alliances have to be based on specific ideals and shared policy goals, and we’d be fully justified to have a deal with the Greens on the grounds that FPTP is a big old con. It’s not just going to be about trying to get easy wins, or even reducing costs, but if properly planned, it becomes a protest against FPTP, and a campaign for electoral reform.
Obviously to work we’d need to put forward someone that the natural Green voters can back, someone with a good knowledge of and commitment towards the environment, and probably to the left of the party. Meanwhile, we’d be expecting the Green candidate to be one of their more pragmatic members who is prepared to do the paper-work and not just attend marches.
In all this talk of alliances, collaborations, or ‘pandering’, I go back to my previous comment that we must remember that the views and attitudes of voters may be very different from party members, never mind their leadership. The people of Momentum may be impossible to work with, but there are a great many people who have voted for Labour who are very reasonable, and could be persuaded to vote for the Lib Dems, so long as we don’t insult them for not doing so sooner.
In order to carry out change, the three way split in progressive opinion has to be taken into account, as well as on First Past the Post.
Unless the three parties field single candidates in winnable seats at least the once, no single one can prevent the Tories getting back in and with Labour and UKIP down, the Tories could easily increase their position to hold power for a generation.
It could go under “Reform Alliance”
Labour are unlikely to go for it, the Greens would do, but it has to be tried and it is possible that co-operation would add up to something more than the sum of the parts.