The existing atmosphere within Labour MPs these days adheres to Edgar's law. It affirms that the scale of each adversity is solely measured in comparison to unforeseen calamities. As the playwright has the outcast offspring of the visionless lord state in King Lear: “The worst is not, provided that we may declare ‘this is the worst’.”
A Succession of Intensifying Crises
According to Edgar's law, there exists no survey so gloomy for Labour that cannot be succeeded by another more depressing; no budget prediction so terrible that the finance ministry won't exacerbate via contradictory signals regarding taxation; no misgivings regarding the leader that won't be heightened by malevolent briefing about a leadership challenge.
Refugee Measures Declaration
Considering this situation, this week's revelation of strategies designed to limit the number of refugees allowed into the United Kingdom, patterned after an infamously harsh Nordic approach, was taken less badly with Labour MPs than predicted. There emerged flashes of backbench anger but no conflagration of rebellion.
Hardening immigration policies is not Labour's comfort zone, however the present arrangement is evidently broken while citizens are furious. Numerous parliamentarians grasp the reasoning that tolerance and community cohesion are easier to cultivate provided there is trust that the nation's borders are secure.
Growing Discontent
Quiet backbenches may also represent foreboding. Parliamentarians have realized that everything is negotiable with a directionless leader of adaptable beliefs. Today's declarations may be unannounced tomorrow. There is no need to advance hastily if successes can be achieved through persistence.
A common complaint concerns the Prime Minister is barely running the government whatsoever, following the transfer of strategic choices to his principal advisor. However, this doesn't mean the leader lacks executive dynamism, he just prefers not to mediate between ministry conflicts or engage in long debates.
Management Method
The leader joined political parties at an advanced stage, initially becoming an MP at the age of 52. He misses understanding for Labour lore – the body of historical arguments, initiatives, personalities and traditional touchstones that connect a leader to the wider movement and its perception of collective mission.
His most personal values are a mystery including to ministers. According to an experienced party member states: “The Prime Minister is quite different in his role through suggesting that his individual beliefs are not for public consumption.”
Electoral Repercussions
The image presented representing the leader in last year's election campaign has similarly not produced its purported benefits: administrative capability leading to societal regeneration. Assuming Britain possessed a dual-party structure, the memory of previous difficulties under the Tories may continue acceptance of the administration.
That presages a devastating defeat for party representatives during local and devolved elections next May. It would constitute a moment of extreme peril for the Prime Minister, if he endures that long.
Leadership Questions
Not present within these evaluations exists consensus regarding the person of a replacement and their proposed policies might contrast with existing administration plans. This defect regarding changeover preparations is mentioned by the prime minister's defenders among numerous justifications to continue supporting the existing prime minister.
Even as unhappy parliamentarians may flinch at such cautions, they similarly perceive within them the familiar, empty ringing of low ambition which causes hopelessness with current conditions. It represents the noise of lack of success to characterize the leadership as merely a series of strategies for clinging on.
Concluding Thoughts
It is hard to inspire faithfulness toward such a purpose. Numerous parliamentarians have attempted. They have adhered to official positions, justified it to constituents, followed party discipline, trusted promises that their issues received attention.
Regicide is fraught with risk, however, does it present greater hazards versus acting as if that the existing prime minister holds responses to big questions that he never even names? The Shakespearean principle suggests prudence in ousting an incumbent leader. The replacement might prove more disastrous.
“The heaviness of this sad time we need to follow; State true sentiments, not what we ought to say.”
