In his New Year Message, Labour Leader and Doncaster North MP, Ed Miliband spoke of a need to instil a sense of hope within families and young people across the country who are struggling under the weight of a flat-lining economy. But as we look ahead to 2012, the term hope is probably more appropriately applied to Miliband's own position.
Facing a Government introducing deeply unpopular cuts to services and the support on which so many families rely, and austerity measures the likes of which we have not seen for many years, Miliband and Labour should be leading the polls quite clearly; yet this is not happening.
Politicians on all side of the political divide, particularly those in a bad position, are often keen to argue that they don't pay attention to the polls and that the only ones they concentrate on and which matter are those which see voters actually putting a cross on a ballot paper. That is the official line at any rate.
The reality is that polls do matter. They matter as the only real litmus test for the mood of the country to a particular policy, party or leader between elections. They set the tone, and can ultimately lead to the downfall of leaders whose backbenchers become restless over repeatedly poor scoring. That is why Miliband will be hoping that this year he can hang on. Whether he can or not is an open question.
I nail my colours to the mast at this point and say that I voted for Ed Miliband in the leadership contest. But who can ignore the fact that the Independent on Sunday's poll of polls, puts the Conservatives 1% ahead of Labour for the first time in 14 months? It suggests that David Cameron's effective use of a veto at the pre-Christmas EU summit has caused voters to re-assess his premiership and party. Following such a dramatic move, Miliband and his team now need something equally eye-catching, to get noticed in a way which they have so far failed to achieve. This year, and as early as possible within it, Miliband needs to capture the public's imagination and get us to view him as a serious Prime Minister-in-waiting.
How that can be achieved is a tricky question, given the lack of spending money available to any government or putative government in current circumstances. Andrew Harrup, general secretary of the Fabian Society has for example mooted the idea of an albeit temporary cut in income tax. As he argued in the most recent edition of the Fabian Review:
For two years only and with suitable claw-backs from higher-rate taxpayers, Balls and Miliband should call for the basic rate of income tax to be slashed. Only then would people sit up and take notice, perhaps reappraising Labour for the first time in years, and forcing the Tories onto the wrong side of the argument.
Some people on the left will recoil at the thought of tax cuts as the welfare state is threatened, and it's true that none of the options are pretty. But if the left really wants to argue for economic stimulus as a counter to the self-defeating vortex of austerity, it must side-step the statist trap that has been set for us.
Time-limited tax cuts are the middle way between economic despair and the charge of deficit denial.
Difficult though it might be for many on the left of the party, the advantage of such a move would be not only to get Miliband and the opposition leadership noticed, but more importantly position the party at the much-vaunted centre ground of British politics where elections are won and lost, centre ground which crucially resides mostly in the south. This would also stave off the problem and accusation, which is beginning to stick, that Labour are now a northern only party.
The fact very much remains that Labour can only win the next election by appealing to 'middle England' which now as so often in the past is predominantly in the South. Having all the support he can muster from the north will not see Miliband into 10 Downing Street. Worse, as recent polling by YouGov has revealed, David Cameron is actually a more popular figure than Miliband as Prime Minister even across the north.
With all indications pointing to Boris Johnson staving off a challenge by Ken Livingstone for Mayor of London despite, for example, the devastating impact the Government's Housing Benefit reforms will have on the capital, May is likely to be the crunch moment. With backbench, and particularly Blairite, Labour MPs chomping at the bit to get back to power as quickly as possible, Miliband can expect little slack.
If, as I consider a distinct possibility, he finds himself falling on his sword, keep a close eye on Pontefract and Castleford MP and Shadow Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper. Having been effectively endorsed in any future contest by her husband and Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls and having topped the elections within the Parliamentary Labour Party for the Shadow Cabinet in 2010 her stock is on the rise. With a background in economics, substantial experience of Government, an ability to straddled the Blair/Brown divide which has so dogged Labour and more importantly given her ability to come across as empathetic and dare I say it "normal" on the Daybreak sofa, 2012 could be her year to save Labour from the abyss. As John Rentoul has argued:
Yvette Cooper could have won in 2010, had she not said that the time was not right for her and supported her husband, Ed Balls, instead. She may be barely known outside Westminster – just ask a normal person who the Shadow Home Secretary is – but she came top of the Shadow Cabinet elections among MPs before Ed Miliband abolished them. If she is clever, the Brownites and Blairites could unite behind her. Her politics are not mine, but she would be populist on law and order, and she would certainly be noticed.
And the thing about leadership is that you don't know what someone is really like until they do it.
What do you think? Is Miliband in serious trouble? And could Cooper be the one to recapture the initiative for Labour?
Ed Jacobs is a political consultant at the Leeds based Public Affairs Company and devolution correspondent for the centre-left political and policy blog, Left Foot Forward.
Comments
Sign in to comment or to join the conversation
6 January 2012 9:24AM
The Labour party has to think of an alternative economic policy to Tory cuts and
their Capitalist market economies, and trickle down theories, where the law of the
jungle applies and the devil take the hindmost. Labour has alternative policies but
Ed M. clearly is not getting the alternative economic policy message across.
I would much rather see Yvette Cooper leading the party as there would initially
be a bounce effect with a woman leading the opposition and a capable former
senior minister. By all accounts she is a 'clever' woman and probably can get the
message across, which Ed has so far failed to do. Something has to be done
soon as there might be an election anytime now.
6 January 2012 9:51AM
Yes, Ed is in trouble, and yes, Yvette Cooper could be a very good leader.
Unfortunately I fear the Labour party does not have an easy procedural method to bring about the change that is needed.
Yvette as leader with husband Ed Balls as chancellor could be tricky, or maybe perfect..? At least you would be pretty sure they would provide a united front, rather than the damaging relationship Brown had with Blair.
6 January 2012 9:58AM
Maybe it is not a requirement these days, but has Yvette Cooper (who has without doubt grown into her roles) ever articulated any broad political philosophy; or - on a different aspect - shown she has any of the baser political arts ?
I see her as an excellent candidate for Chancellor but she surely needs to have more of a "vision thing" to be Prime Minister.
However, and to be flippant, perhaps we will have a hint she is considering running if - a la Thatcher - she lowers her timbre
6 January 2012 10:22AM
John Rentoul's endorsements have pretty much been the Kiss of Death.
6 January 2012 10:23AM
Well i must congratulate the Gaurdian again on inredibly Lazy Journalism, Yvette one to watch really?? ( Everybody has been saying this ) conservatives 1% lead , yesterday different poll Labour 4% lead.
well i also voted for Ed M , if labour have to be more centreist then i dont have anyone to vote for in my country , i am a true leftist, i also feel sorry for the right though they have UKIP, so now we must all be middle of the road, a mix of yellow, red and blue,
If we are to be only a centre politic country then we will become the new China or old Russia , but at least old Russia stood for something, we stand for looking good and talking bullshit, you only have to listen to Clegg and Cameron to prove that, ( Fact )
6 January 2012 10:25AM
Yes, Labour should jump out of the frying pan into the fire.
For all his shortcomings- these are many, Mr Milliband showed that he is his own man when he challenged his sibling for the leadership.
Ms Cooper on the other hand ducked the last leadership contest and it has been reported that this was because Mr Balls considered that "it would be weird" .
So, she proved herself to be not an independent clear headed leader but just a shrinking violet.
Equally, now it has been reported that Mr Balls is keen for her to contest in any future elections. If it becomes a reality and she throws her hat in who would the Labour party and subsequently the electorate be voting for? Would that be Ms Yvette or Mr Balls hiding behind her and pulling strings? All this does not make her a towering figure or a potential future prime minister .
6 January 2012 10:43AM
The Guardian and its commentators still promoting the 'cult of personality'.
6 January 2012 11:49AM
Ed Miliband is in trouble because the press says he is! Is obsessed that he and will report on nothing else when it comes to his leadership.
In the last Prime Ministers Question Time Ed Miliband asked 6 serious questions, 3 about the stunning unemployment figures and 3 about Europe, Cameron was evasive and defensive throughout and in response to one question he made scripted 18 months joke about Ed Miliband having a brother to the baying joy of the Eurosceptics, already foaming joyfully at Cameon's incredible inability to negotiate. This sorry spectacle in the press quickly became a triumph and the news since has been dominated by Miliband's 'ineffectual performance' at Questions Time and the bounce in the polls which we all knew Cameron would expect from a Eurosceptic publc. Every newspaper end of year report concentrates, barely mentioning Milibands interventions which effectively stopped Murdoch's News International forever dominating our broadcast media (with full supprt of the Tories while Cameron was still defending his red haired pals). If Miliband did nothing else this would go down as a great achievement finally freeing labour and the country from their collective hypnosis.
There are serious issue for labour about it's record, it's stance on Europe and many other things but they have no chance of making any progress while the press continues to hold the 'persoinality above all else line' and this includes The Guardian. You are not responding to public preceptions of Ed Miliband, you are creating them. If you can start treating politics as something a bit deeper than the X factor, wse might.
6 January 2012 12:06PM
You can not change people, to can only change the people, I propose Diane Abbot for Labor leader. She at least would be amusing.
6 January 2012 12:25PM
In fact the only party not to have been 'in bed' with Murdoch, wining and dining the press at every opportunity have been the LibDems!
The Labour government (including Miliband) were disgusting over a 13 year period with their sycophantic behaviour towards Murdoch & Co.
Miliband has been totally ineffectual at PMQ's for all the electorate to see, nothing to do with his whining nasal voice or 'weird' appearance.
Miliband is associated with labour failures whilst in office (he was a government Minister) as are Balls, Cooper, Byrne, Murphy, and quite a few other failures like Eagles, and labour will not progress until all of the previous incompetents are thrown off the shadow front bench, in fact they should hide away in their constituencies like Brown.
6 January 2012 12:27PM
@RCClayton: Cameron has no 'vision', yet he finds himself leading the country. I think Yvette Cooper is definitely Labour's best bet, should Milliband fail this year.
6 January 2012 12:40PM
The Guardian operates in an alternative universe - I don't think anyone is as obsessed with the leadership of the Labour Party in the way this paper currently is. It seems to be having its own feeding frenzy - quite bizarre, but then January is a bit of a dead time for proper analysis.
I also don't accept (as this article seems to) that Boris Johnson's re-election is a foregone conclusion. Though it must be said that I don't fraternise with the sort of people stupid enough to vote for him, and maybe they are more numerous than I imagine (perhaps some of them work at the Guardian).
6 January 2012 12:53PM
No Ed isn't in trouble, but yes Yvette would be a better leader (but she refused to stand).
6 January 2012 1:10PM
Irrespective of how they re-arrange the deck chairs - the fact remains that they are a bunch of failures and no-hopers salvaged from the dregs of Brown's disastrous team. Whether red Ed remains leader - or whether Yvette Balls replaces him - labour will thankfully be in the political wilderness for at least a generation.
6 January 2012 1:15PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
6 January 2012 1:16PM
The above artical was writyen by Peter Obone by the way,
6 January 2012 1:22PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
6 January 2012 1:41PM
@Pavis:
I think if we wanted to read the Telegraph or similar, we'd know where to find it. Make a link if you want, but please don't reproduce their propaganda in full here.
6 January 2012 1:50PM
Let Ed carry on doing what he is doing without the gags at pmqs.Arguing with somebody who knows the questions in advance and has the last say is never going to be easy!.
Clegg is now coming out after nearly two years saying he is going to clamp down on tax evasion.I might be stupid but with us in such financial difficulties was this not a priority instead of closing sure starts and attacking the disabled on incapacity first.
I also think that Ed should keep his eye on what develops in the Brooks ,Coulson and Cameron saga because I think much more will come out in the coming months.
We also need to see more of Alan Johnson,Chuka Umana,Alistair Darling andAndy Burnham.
6 January 2012 2:03PM
I once saw a particular Ed Milliband as the Environmental Minister being interviewed by a woman (Film director Franny Amstrong) standing on her head.
He handled the interview so well, he was comfortable, charming, funny and relaxed, since becoming leader he looks anything but. Obviously the advisors and spin doctors have gotten to him, if a man has so little conviction in himself how can he expect a nation to follow him on his path..... Whatever that may be.
Yvette Cooper looks confident, strong and friendly her problem is so did Ed. As mentioned in the piece -
"The thing about leadership is that you don't know what someone is really like until they do it."
6 January 2012 2:10PM
Yvette Cooper as leader? No. Whoever might get the job, they cannot be another relic of NewLabour.
6 January 2012 2:58PM
From the article:
First, let's dispel the myth that Labour can restore its fortunes by returning to the Blairite centre ground where the party's vote, 1997-2010 (13.5m - 10.7m - 9.5m - 8.4m), shows it spent 13 years carrying out a long, slow abortion on itself.
Next, examine the reality that over 50% of the working age population are no longer in gainful employment - not because they don't want to work but because the workload is being pared away by a technological revolution. Not enough purchasing power and not enough work.. Never mind elections, it is the much-vaunted centre ground where the economy is being lost - forever.
Middle England is clinging to its sinking ship because it has nowhere else to go and noone else to listen to but the static polls of its own desperation. But the largest group in the election result were the 16m who registered to vote and then decided that with Gordon Brown in charge and no talk of austerity it wasn't necessary to do so and they have stopped talking to the pollsters altogether.
It's Labour's turn to belong with the silent majority - watching and waiting.
6 January 2012 4:25PM
oh cmon rolandb, every newspaper is propaganda...I guess the Guardian removed it due to copyright issues.
The point is that I read The Guardian and The Telegraph to get a balance of opinion to make my own mind up...I can easily see how you can become brainwashed by politcal dogma by sticking to 1 broadsheet.
I am simply trying to give people some sense of the other side of the arguement and therefore people have the opportunity to decide for themselves.
Oh and thank you so much for giving me permission to publish a link...here it is...
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/peteroborne/
6 January 2012 4:45PM
A typical 'political commentator' view. How does the Labour Party get itself elected? How does it present itself? Who leads it? What eye catching little piece of policy can it pull out of the hat as a vote winner?
Not a word about principles. What does the Labour Party stand for these days? Who knows. Its only purpose seems to be to exist for the sake of existence. To play a game of oppositional politics built on who performs best in the weekly stand-up that is Prime Minister's Question Time in parliament.
I cannot understand why the trade union movement continues to fund a Labour Pary that has for many years failed to do anything to show that it represents working people. They should pull the plug and let it whither away.
6 January 2012 4:47PM
I really do not understand why Cameron does not get more criticism, Thatcher was hated when she was in power, comedians, musicians, commentators, pretty much everyone gave her some stick and yet Cameron just isn’t getting it! All this navel gazing about Milliband is missing the real criminal in this piece.
6 January 2012 5:47PM
How exactly is Cameron the criminal????? He is simply trying to put right the god awful shite of a mess that Labour (and Milliband) left him.
6 January 2012 11:26PM
In recent years this paper has earned my respect for some very good journalism.
However its editorial output is increasing driving me up the wall. The print media in this country is dominated by the right, it is spectacularly unhelpful for the Guardian to be battering Ed Miliband all day every day. As plenty have said, of the credible candidates that ran for leader he is perhaps the furthest 'left' and seems a decent enough person.
He clearly has difficulty selling himself, I think he could help himself a bit by completely losing it with Cameron in the Commons next time he gets all evasive and Flashman, telling the bastard to show show respect for Parliament and the country by answering a fucking question now and again.
Aaaanyway in a year in which Labour lead the polls until Cameron's PR stunt veto, Ed's leadership has been attacked on every front. Despite delivering the best conference speech of the leaders (admittedly competition was weak), the Guardian continued to beat him up and as soon as the Tories briefly jump ahead the sound of a thousand knives being sharpened is heard.
We Tory-haters (I use in place of "the Left") are our own worst enemy sometimes. There are some honest to god battles to be fought. Instead we have had Ed-bashing and forty different choir-preaching "Thatcher was a bitch" articles. We lost that one badly, we should move on and focus on now before we lose big again.
7 January 2012 3:48PM
Perhaps the key question of all is how does Labour regan economic credibility in the eyes of the electorate. Jim Murphy's acceptance of some of the defence cuts being made by the Government suggests the "Blairites" for want of a better phrase want to get more specific whilst Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls is talking more in the abstract.
Anyt thoughts anyone?
9 January 2012 1:33PM
Its worth following the link to the 'Public Affairs Company' and asking yourself where their interests lie.
This is just another piece of waffle from the neo-liberal consensus, designed to try and persuade us that nothing can ever really change, and the only choice is between different brands of managerialists.