The existing mood among parliamentary Labour members these days follows Edgar's law. It affirms that the magnitude of every hardship is only assessed relative to yet-to-come catastrophes. As the playwright lets the exiled child of the blinded Earl state within the tragedy: “The direst does not exist, as long as we may declare ‘this marks the bottom’.”
A Succession of Worsening Crises
As per this principle, there exists no opinion poll so pessimistic regarding the party that it can't be followed by one even bleaker; no budget prediction so poor that the finance ministry cannot worsen through mixed indications on tax; no doubts concerning the Prime Minister that can't be amplified through malicious leaks about a leadership challenge.
Immigration Rules Revelation
Considering this situation, this week's announcement of plans intending to limit the number of refugees granted entry to the United Kingdom, modelled on an infamously harsh Nordic approach, went down more favorably with Labour MPs than anticipated. There were sparks of MP frustration but no conflagration of opposition.
Hardening immigration policies is far from Labour's comfort zone, however the present arrangement is clearly failing and voters are angry. Most MPs grasp the position that acceptance and community cohesion are easier to cultivate if assurance exists that the nation's borders are safely guarded.
Increasing Dissatisfaction
Reserved MP positions might likewise signal foreboding. Parliamentarians have realized that each issue is discussable with a directionless leader with flexible principles. Today's declarations could be withdrawn tomorrow. There exists no necessity to rush over the top provided triumphs can be secured by attrition.
A regular criticism involves the leader is barely running the government at all, following the transfer of political judgment to his chief of staff. However, this doesn't mean the head of government misses managerial vigor, he merely chooses to refrain from intervening in departmental disputes or undertake protracted arguments.
Management Method
The Prime Minister entered political parties during later professional life, originally joining the legislature when he was fifty-two. He misses understanding about movement history – the body of past debates, campaigns, characters and social allusions that connect a leader to the larger group and its feeling of shared purpose.
His most personal values are a mystery even to the cabinet. According to an experienced party member states: “The Prime Minister is quite different as head of government through suggesting that his individual beliefs are not for public consumption.”
Electoral Repercussions
The product packaged representing the leader during the previous electoral contest has also not delivered its claimed rewards: executive proficiency culminating in countrywide revitalization. If Britain still had a two-party system, the memory of previous difficulties during Conservative rule might prolong tolerance for the party.
This foreshadows a devastating defeat of Labour candidates in council and devolved elections in the coming spring. It would constitute a time of great danger for the leader, if he endures through that period.
Succession Concerns
Missing from these assessments exists consensus regarding the person of a successor and their intended agenda may differ from the current government's agenda. This defect within succession arrangements is mentioned by those backing the incumbent as one of many reasons to continue supporting the existing prime minister.
Even as unhappy parliamentarians could hesitate regarding these alerts, they also hear within them the familiar, meaningless sound of modest goals that induces despair at the status quo. It is the sound of failure to describe the approach as simply a sequence of tactics for holding power.
Concluding Thoughts
It proves difficult to inspire faithfulness to such a cause. And most Labour MPs have tried. They have adhered to established policies, justified it to constituents, obeyed the whips, trusted promises that their concerns were heard.
Regicide involves significant danger, yet, might it be more dangerous than pretending that the existing prime minister possesses solutions about important matters that remain unmentioned? Edgar's law invites caution regarding the replacement of an incumbent leader. The replacement might prove more disastrous.
“The heaviness of these difficult days we need to follow; Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say.”
