by Jonathan Ashworth
Today, us MPs will be summoned to the other place to hear Her Majesty’s Gracious Address, the first Queen’s speech by a majority Conservative government for almost 19 years.
Later, in the Commons, jubilant Tory MPs will wave their order papers and cheer the returning triumphant prime minister Cameron to the rafters. His every (lame) gag will be met with guffaws as if he’s now the Tory answer to Peter Kay. Every snide put-down of an opponent will be met with much whooping and exaggerated slapping of thighs.
As the prime minister exits the chamber and heads for his customary glass of claret in the members’ dining room, ambitious Tory MPs will queue up to shake his hand. And let’s face it, given the scale of our defeat who can blame them?
But although our defeat in the country was resounding the parliamentary arithmetic that has consequently been thrown up offers even the most pessimistic Labour Uncut correspondent some hope.
Five years ago when Harriet Harman spoke for the opposition in the Queen’s speech debate she faced government benches with a working majority of 83. Today she will be opposite government benches with a working majority of just 16.
In the last Parliament, government MPs rebelled in 35 per cent of divisions. In those votes where the opposition defeated the government we won often because Tory MPs – many of whom have just been re-elected to the Commons – routinely voted against their own side.
Both the Tory whips office and Labour whips office will be well aware that only nine Tory MPs need to rebel for the Conservatives to lose when all opposition parties vote against them. Just nine, that’s all.
In the last Parliament four Tories voted against boundary change while another seven were absent while 51 MPs rebelled on the EU budget debate. On the PubCo vote, 17 Tories broke ranks to vote against their own government, while on their final defeat of the last Parliament, that shabby last-minute coup to oust Speaker Bercow, 16 Tories rebelled and voted with Labour and other Opposition MPs.
Tory whips will be hoping that their slender majority will instil some discipline. Far from it – already we’re seeing Tory MPs squabbling over the abolition of the Human Rights Act, over boundary reform and the EU referendum. David Cameron’s authority in the Commons will become more and more precarious with every reshuffle that passes over increasingly truculent backbenchers.
Over the following months the cunning and craftiness of the opposition whips office that has become the established hallmark of Labour chief whip Rosie Winterton, deputy chief whip Alan Campbell and third-in-command Mark Tami will again be the order of the day with key votes sprung at the most opportune moments.
Ahead of each and every one of these votes, Tory Whips will be instructed to tour the estate making sure every one of their side is present and able to vote. When the division bells ring every nook and cranny will need to be double checked. A couple of poor whips will no doubt be given ‘toilet duty’ to make sure none of their colleague have been caught short at the key moment. It will be hard, thankless, grinding work for these Tory whips for five long years.
On top of this there is also the outside chance that by-elections and possible defections could whittle down the majority further as happened to John Major final sad years in office.
To be sure of getting their programme through Tory ministers should now brace themselves for the chaos that is about to be unleashed as every piece of legislation has to be negotiated not just with their own insatiable backbenches but by various minor parties in the House as well.
It is entirely feasible that the Tories could win the support of the Liberal Democrats, Unionists, UKIP or, when they eventually grow tired of trying to stop Dennis Skinner sitting in his usual place, the SNP – but every vote bargained for comes at a cost.
David Cameron should enjoy his glass of claret today. But for the man who spent an election campaign shouting ‘chaos’ in every stump speech he gave, I suspect in this Parliament that’s exactly what he’s going to get.
Jonathan Ashworth MP is Shadow Cabinet Office Minister and a member of Labour’s NEC
Tags: Jonathan Ashworth, Labour defeat, narrow majority, Parliamentary notebook, queen's speech
‘But although our defeat in the country was resounding the parliamentary arithmetic that has consequently been thrown up offers even the most pessimistic Labour Uncut correspondent some hope.’
Jonathan, have you any idea just how bad this sort of statement sounds to voters (particularly those who voted Tory)?
You are basically saying that you feel that your party was fundamentally rejected by the electorate, but can still have plenty of fun trying to block the democratic will of the people!
Not only does that show you up as just another vacuous tribal Westminster tactician, it indicates you don’t even really understand the facts.
The Tories’ majority is narrow because they only got 36.8% of the votes. It took more votes to elect elect each Labour MP than each Tory, although it was UKIP that really suffered in this regard. Douglas Carswell will be speaking for 3.8 million voters, when he stands up and gets laughed at.
It’s all a shambles, but we need some kind of government and I guess it has to be the Tories under our outdated voting system. Their mandate is weak, but it is also real. If all you are looking to do is block and spoil, rather than try and win members from other parties around through debates, do you really think you will be doing your job properly?
It sounds like you would be more gainfully employed if you spent most of the next 5 years back in your constituency, listening to the people you represent and helping them out at local level.
I presume we won’t see any footage of you faking a laugh, when Andy ‘Chris Rock’ Burnham displays his razor-sharp wit at PMQs?
It sounds like we can expect more of the same from our MPs, who still seem incapable of learning why voters feel so disconnected from them. Most will be just content that Labour won’t get its hands on the keys to the safe for many years, even if there is political gridlock.
This article epitomises the unpleasantness, narrowness of vision and bloody mindedness of a losing Party.
If the roles were reversed, the author would be crying “foul”.
No wonder politicians are rated lower than car salesmen if this is an example of their thinking in the running of the country. Apply the same tactics in any other walk of life and you would be fired, fined , imprisoned – or all three.
Lol I think you under estimate how much things are going to change in the real world, ironically Labours Leadership have been acting as though they won the election since 2010…because as long as your remaining MPs cling to “safe seats” for the idle they have….little things like policy and who runs the country make no difference to them and they know this…unfortunately for all you so do an increasing number of the public.
As wafer thin as his majority might be, in each Parliamentary vote he only needs a majority of one to win. Labour can only mount a credible opposition to anything Cameron wants to do by keeping the SNP very much onside. Without them backing Labour, Cameron’s majority is massive to the extent he doesn’t even need to concern himself with his own ‘awkward squad’ and he’ll have no problems doing what ever he feels like.
So Labour better stop slagging the SNP and better start wooing them – otherwise it may as well not bother turning up because it’s presence will be no better than pointless.
I agree with Madasfish. The author mentions if 9 Conservative MP’s rebelled it would take every single opposition MP to stand with them – unlikely. The DUP and UUP could easily triple the Governments majority by voting with the Conservatives. They are both unionist parties, so obvious fits with the Conservatives.
With respect, Jonathan, that’s quite a lot of bile for a man in public life to post on a public website. Is this the sort of thing that pumps up party activists, or is it just disappointment at the outcome of the GE?
A couple of observations seem worthwhile, even so.
First, your article had a rather perverse effect (on me, at least): it shows ordinary Conservative MPs as individuals with personal views & principles rather than merely party-lobby-fodder; and it suggests that you personally despise them for not being automatons ready to vote the party line no matter what. Do you really consider that lobby-fodder is what an MP should be? Is that all you are? Do you support all Labour policies 100% no matter what?
Come to think of it, maybe this is what Labour expects of its MPs. It would explain why the leadership candidates did such a ludicrous about turn: Mr Miliband’s stepping down suddenly released them from the One True Party Orthodoxy to think for themselves.
Second, in highlighting the individuality of Conservative MPs, your article provides a strong reminder that the last Labour government was not only crippled but contaminated by internal feuds which were all the more poisonous for being kept under wraps.
When one puts this ‘my party right or wrong’ approach alongside the difficulty Labour has in getting rid of an ineffective leader, one wonders: maybe an inability to distinguish between valid loyalty and misplaced loyalty is one of Labour’s traits.
Personally, I don’t mind people (even political parties) having disagreements and speaking up for what they believe in.
You know, that’s exactly what the electorate wants to see – the losing party doing all it can to hold up the business of government and playing imbecile Parliamentary games for fun. Yeah, comrades, that’ll teach the damn electorate to be EVIL and WICKED enough not to vote for CLEARLY PROGRESSIVE and RIGHT parties, won’t it?
….especially if you’re going to be snuggled up hard to the Enemies of the Union, who have no interest whatsoever in the national common weal, but actively seek to disrupt and frustrate the process of Parliamentary government. The weaker and more disorganised Westminster looks, the happier they’ll be.
I’d like to say something witty, pithy or insightful about this piece of drivel, but the MP Jonathan Ashworth seems to be a delusional, spiteful and bitter twat.
Is this really the level Labour and its MP’s have come to ? Hang your head on shame Ashworth.
There seems to be a rash of concern trolling in the comments. The tories have a mandate of sorts, but it is thin. They do not have the majority support of the electorate who voted, never mind those who didn’t, so Labour has every right to hold their feet to the fire when it can. It won’t anyway stop them implementing the kind of radical agenda the likes of which Labour didn’t dare when it had a majority of 100.
Andy says:
May 27, 2015 at 7:10 pm
“There seems to be a rash of concern trolling in the comments. The tories have a mandate of sorts, but it is thin”
If the Tories have the above WTF do labour have?
Andy – They do not have the majority support of the electorate who voted,
Little challenge for you – name a government that did. Bit of a clue, don’t waste your time looking this side of the second world war.
Andy says:
May 27, 2015 at 7:10 pm
There seems to be a rash of concern trolling in the comments. The tories have a mandate of sorts, but it is thin. They do not have the majority support of the electorate who voted, never mind those who didn’t, so Labour has every right to hold their feet to the fire when it can. It won’t anyway stop them implementing the kind of radical agenda the likes of which Labour didn’t dare when it had a majority of 100.
Andy
Perhaps you might ask yourself WHY Labour did not implement a radical agenda.
As for trolling, most of us have been posting here for years…
Go on. Indulge me. Why do a bunch of folk who clearly have Tory sympathies spend their time posting on a Labour website? Isn’t pb.com the place for telling labourites what they ought to be doing?
And the reason Labour failed to promote a more progressive agenda was fear of a corrosive right wing press. Purely and simply. If they had balls they would have pressed on, but they didn’t.
Andy
In case you noticed, this is the internet. Unless really abusive I can post on almost any site.
I choose to post here because I enjoy the comments.
If you think this site should be for “like minded” people who don’t want to hear any criticsim of their beloved party, go ahead. After all, this site has been saying for 5 years:
Ed is rubbish
The message is rubbish
A core vote strategy is rubbish.
Meanwhile on Labour List you hardly had a word of criticism and any such criticism was drowned in a deluge of abuse, some very unpleasant.
So you have a choice: Have a debate or be wrong.
You were wrong. No doubt it hurts. But when you say “And the reason Labour failed to promote a more progressive agenda was fear of a corrosive right wing press.” I laugh.
Fear? Scared?
See what a competent leader did: He got (grudging) respect from the City and voters before being elected because he told his message to them in simple words, and they could understand it..and it made sense..(Blair pre 1997 .. a continuation of John Smith).
And an uncompetent one? : Failed to get his message across , gained no respect , consorted with known off this planet people (Izzard,and Brand ), used big words which no-one could not understand (predistribution anyone?) and told business they were predatory and evil.
And then you think it’s all the Press’s fault?!!!!!!!!!!
May I suggest a reality check. You are in denial.
Andy if labour had the balls we’d have been more left wing, and done even worse…
I recall when 5 million read the sun the other day,no internet, satellite TV, there was few media outlets and. The press destroyed labour
I don’t disagree with your premise that Ed was crap and his strategy was rubbish. That after all was self evident. But was Cameron’s really any better – his failure to deliver promises on the deficit and immigration slightly moderated by a fake boom engineered by fundamental interference in the housing market. Yeah, what a record.
What really won Cameron the election was serendipity. The Scottish vote delivered him a double bonus that he could hardly have envisioned. Firstly, it put the Scottish Labour party on the wrong side of a massive wedge issue, then secondly, as a result it enabled him to reprise Project Fear! Fear! Fear of being governed by scary jock people – in kilts! As ever Cameron being the king of short term tactics leapt on this, notwithstanding that whilst he may have won the election, guaranteeing us a few years in the glorious sunlit uplands of Tory government, the longer term consequence is that he’s laid the foundations of the end of the Union. Master tactician he may be but he couldn’t strategise his way out of a paper bag. The tosser.
Ed is rubbish
The message is rubbish
A core vote strategy is rubbish.
Not to mention that now the election is done, dusted and lost, all of a sudden virtually the whole Shadow Cabinet is saying the same thing – which means that if Ed had of somehow won, virtually his whole Cabinet would have been living a lie. Which in turn means they are – to a man and woman, totally gutless and spineless and would have gone along with it even though they didn’t believe in it. Shameful and shocking – especially when you consider that a large chunk of them have put themselves forward to be Leader/Deputy Leader when they have already displayed that they have no integrity or moral position whatsoever. Whoever Labour picks is going to face constant ridicule and belittlement right up to May 2020 because of this alone.
Tafia, OK, Cooper and balls, wanted more Austerity, from the treasury,and could only get away with what they wanted, and from the debuty ranks, Healey,Ali, and Bradshaw, at least weren’t shadow cabinet, Watson use to be, resigned in disgrace,and agreed with Eds views.
The worrying thing, is a lot of the supporters of the candidates, now denouncing the manifesto, were backing it 3 weeks go.