A few comments on the by-election

 

I haven't a lot that is original to add to the analysis that has already appeared on the Gorton and Denton by-election.   I did find the Substack contributions of Manchester-based political scientist Rob Ford in the run up to the election very helpful, not least in understanding the complex electoral geography of the constituency.

I am a little surprised at ow little comment there has been on the performance of a credible Conservative candidate, at a time when there is supposed to be a revival in enthusiasm about Kamikaze.

It is also worth bearing in mind that governments do not always lose by-elections: the Blair Government lost none in its first term.

I also find it concerning that over 10,000 electors were prepared to vote for a chancer parachuted into the constituency who in my view expressed opinions that some would regard as racist.  He also came across as a nasty piece of work and a bad loser.

So I am still looking at political asylum destinations.  Apparently my first choice, Finland, is very strict about applications.  You have to declare your intentions on arrival and are then sent to an unpleasant camp.

Luxembourg looks more promising.  Admittedly their adverts urging people to come to live in the Grand Duchy are targeted at youngsters in finance, but I did give some help to the University of Luxembourg when it was getting off the ground.   It also offers free public transport.

Time to catch up with Guy Bland, the fictitious MP for Borestshire South.   Bland has always been a Starmer loyalist and like many in the PLP thinks there is not a credible candidate in the PLP to replace him.   Letting Burnham stand in the by-election would have cost Labour the Manchester mayor's position and the campaign would have cost a party short of money around £1 million.

He does think that Laboir should realise that graduates are among its core voters and something needs to be done about an essentially unfair student loans system, especially those on Phase 2 loans.   Almost all the cost of higher education has been placed on the individual although there are clear societal benefits.

Blamd's loyalty hss been repaid with his appointment as an assistant whip, not for a region as is more usual but for Labour MPs in predomunantly rural seats (albeit difficult to define).   The concordat between the PM and the NFU at least gives him a decent start.  Because all government posts that can be renumerated have been take up, the post will be unpaid.

In his private life his wife, a former BBC religious broadcaster, has felt a call to the priesthood and is hoping to go to theological college when their child is a little older.   Taking communion in Felpersham cathedral, she felt the Real Presence.

Attending a CoE primary school and sharing a flat with a theology PhD (which involved inviting a  priest to Sunday lunch) have given me a lay interest in theological matters, developed further when I spent several years as chair of the friends of my local parish church.   However, the doctrine of transubstantiation has always caused me problems and is one reason why I am not a communicant member of the CoE.  I can still remember a three hour argument with two Catholic colleagues about the topic and I have no wish to repeat it.

Harold Wilson's humble holiday home

Looking back to a  possibly more innocent and less fractious time in British politics when prime minister Harold Wilson tried to boost his down to earth image by holidaying in a humble bungalow on the Isles of Scilly.  He genuinely loved the islands and is buried in Old Town churchyard.

I have posted a few essays I originally wrote for the now defunct Scilly Now and Then which drew on documents in the National Archives at Kew: https://scilliesharoldwilson.blogspot.com/2026/02/harold-wilson-builds-his-holiday-home.html 

Revisiting the 1936 Abdication

Clearing out my house I offered for free a collection of books on the 1936 Abdication.   I got no takers, would that change today?

For authoritative commentary on the monarchy I rely on the authoritative Professor Robert Hazell CBE  at the UCL Constitution Unit (although he was badged as Cambridge University on television).

However, I have noticed some rather misleading commentary by others on the abdication of Edward VIII, subsequently the Duke of Windsor.

I think that was a real constitutional crisis because Winston Churchill, whose judgement was generally unreliable in domestic politics, tried to set up a 'King's Party.' 

Fortunately, that attempt failed.   Edward Windsor was a weak individual with German and Nazi sympathies.   One can even see him as a front man for a Nazi occupation of Britain.

He paid the price in terms of living out the rest of his life in exile and estranged from his family.   His wife in particular took a role in café society which was made up of rich but boring Americans who played golf in Palm Beach,

Some of the tales about the Duchess of Windsor are lurid speculation.  I think that by the time she fled to France she realised she was in too deep and tried to disengage.   Her feud with the Queen Mother (aka Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon) whom she called 'cookie' at least had its amusing aspects.

The deeply socially conservative prime minister, Stanley Baldwin, certainly set out to shaft Edward and he did a good job of it.  He made sure that the concept of a 'morganatic marriage' was never properly considered, although I don't think it would have been acceptable either to the establishment or the public. To deny the Duchess the title of HRH was not really justified in constitutional terms

In many ways it was a footnote in history, but it suddenly acquires an inappropriate relevance.   Robert Hazell has done some interesting comparative work on constitutional monarchies in Europe (unfortunately my copies are currently in store) and I look forward to hearing more from him in the coming weeks.

Can Tories prosper?

Baroness Davidson and the former West Midlands mayor Sir Andy Street have launched a new political project designed to provide a home in the Conservative Party for the politically homeless: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c93v7nnk3vlo

Is KemiKaze listening?  No, she is determined to do battle with Reform on their territory as it becomes the party of failed Tory retreads.   Never mind all the moderates in southern England who voted Liberal Democrat.

There was a time when the Conservative Party had a strong One Nation element.  Clearing out some files recently, I came across some correspondence with Sir Ian Gilmour who was the intellectual doyen of the One Nation tendency.   The story of their elimination is partly the story of Thatcherism, although it is more complex than that.  When I get time I might write about it in more depth.

Indeed, Ian Gilmour and myself had a number of interesting conversations in his room at the Commions and ar White's and we provisionally agreed a plan for me to write an intellectual biography of him as a way of tracing Conservative history, but other more fundable projects got in the way.

The essential argument of Street and Davidson is that the Conservatives should be a (not uncritical) pro-business party which adheres to fiscal responsibility (which KemiKaze also claims to favour).

When I first went to uni in 1965 I was stlll very much influenced by my school friends (although they saw me as rather left wing).   I joined the unfortunately named FUCUA (Federation of University Conservative and Unionist Associations).   With some fellow students we joined an internal Conservative pressure group called Pressure for Economic and Social Toryism.

Going to FUCUA events, I quickly learnt that the Conservative Party was dominated by privately educated Oxbridge types.   I was also radicalised by the Vietnam war and was part of the big demo outside the US Embassy in March 1968.

I wish Davidson and Street (whom I have met and was impressed by) well, but I am afraid that they are too sensible to succeed.

Have we reached peak Reform?

Some recent polls have suggested a dip in support for Reform.   One swallow does not make a summer, but perhaps something is happening.

Despite the defection of yet another washed up, tax avoiding Tory, KemiKaze does seem to be getting more of a grip on her party,   She has improved at PMQs, admittedly from a low base.

Who watches PMQs?   Not that many, but it does affect the party mood and also media judgments.

Starmer's U-turns have helped her, although I think the whole concept of a U-turn impoverishes politics.  It discourages governments from ditching failed policies.

Badenoch also has a narrative in terms of fiscal conservatism or tackling the welfare bill.   Given that state pensions account for around half of all welfare payments, it would be more convincing if she was prepared to ditch the triple lock, but we all know the electoral politics of that.

The Conservative brand is a well entrenched one, so Reform may find it hard to displace if voters think Farage is a bit like a dodgy second hand car salesman.

Anyway, I am delighted that my copy of the British General Election of 2024 is on its way to me.

Who are the party members?

Lots of fascinating data (if you're into that sort of thing) from the party members project at Queen Mary, University of London: https://esrcpartymembersproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/britains-party-members-bale-et-al.pdf?fbclid=IwY2xjawPRxt9leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETA5dUZXU2luUVV3Yzk3QWpic3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHoq22_LuKr8v0ccAP850ntyJqxYl2CWbOSWTN-qEXqe4M8DOAobOQAP33s3V_aem_wu0345rfOoflVFJEVSrieg

The study concludes: 'What comes over most strongly, however, is that we increasingly appear to be seeing not just five parties but two blocs – something that, as the British Election Study has recently shown, also appears to be true in the case of voters. On the one side, we have the members of the so-called ‘progressive’ parties (the Greens, Labour and the Lib Dems). On the other, we have the members of the Conservatives and Reform UK.

 There is still variation within the blocs, but there is, in all sorts of ways, something of a gulf emerging between them. Seen negatively, this suggests a worrying degree of polarisation. Seen positively, it suggests that the fragmentation of the party system may not make coming up with a stable government (albeit one vehemently opposed by whichever bloc doesn’t make it into office) as hard as some imagine.

 If members matter to party leaders – and our research since 2015 suggests to us that they do – then those who belong to parties in either of those two blocs could well support the kind of post-electoral (and even, perhaps, pre-electoral) pacts that may make coalition formation, should it prove necessary, easier.

A coalition may not prove necessary, of course. At the time of writing, observers seem convinced that Reform UK will win an overall majority. If that does come to pass, we hope that those same observers won’t give all the credit to the party’s leader, Nigel Farage. Reform’s members didn’t make him leader, but their efforts may well help to make him prime minister. Also, if he doesn’t make it to Downing Street, then the leaders of those parties determined to stop him will, at least in part, have their own foot soldiers to thank.'

Bleak reading for Labour in poll of economists

A poll of 103 leading economists in the FT today makes bleak reading for those  who hope that an economic recovery will lead to a political recovery for Labour.

Key take home messages:

• Economy will not be strong enough for 'working people' to be better off
• Two-thirds predicted more tax increases before the next election: higher taxes are seen as the path of least resistance when back bench MPs push for more spending
• Economic growth will grind along at 1-2 per cent, around 1 per cent in 2026: OBR forecast of 1.4 per cent unlikely to be beaten unless savings are run down
• Respondents were split on how much further the Bank would be able to cut interest rates
• Weak jobs market with unemployment above 5 per cent, companies likely to be stingy on pay
• There will, however, be lower inflation and energy prices

Another poll of voters commented on in the FT show that Starmer and Reeves have worse ratings that Johnson and Truss,   Can people really think that?   The FT thinks that it is the culmination of disillusionment with politicians over many years.