20 Feb 2019

Split Decision? The emergence of The Independent Group could have a huge impact on the next election

E0407E24-4A61-4F4F-907C7C1AD7E40D5A.jpg

A mere two weeks ago BVCA Insight declared that the emergence of a splinter group from within the parliamentary Labour Party was “highly likely”. The event has actually occurred rather faster than was envisaged.

The operation itself was managed with some efficiency. The media was lured into expecting that the number of dissident Labour MPs would be smaller than it proved to be and while there were some challenges – the inevitable website crash – the launch was carried off with some style.

The Labour leadership were plainly unsure as to how to respond to the situation. A heated meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) on Monday showed how much sympathy there was for those who had left and constituted a collective warning shot that more would follow unless there was a fundamental change in strategy from Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell and Momentum (a shift which, in truth, almost no one in the PLP really believes will be implemented with any sincerity).

The Independent Group also managed neatly to swerve most of the difficult decisions that Insight had identified. The initial seven MPs made it clear that in the short-term this was a purely parliamentary exercise and that the moment for a full-blown new party had not yet arrived. The entity would welcome external backers but in the short-term it would not attempt to form a national organisation as such, it would not be contesting elections nor would it have a conventional leadership structure.

This is all sensible if one assumes that a general election before 2022 is unlikely. The choice of name is basically a holding device which avoids the question of whether the new creation is to be an explicit alternative Labour Party or an alternative to the whole existing party system. This ambiguity allowed the rebels to test whether there might be Conservative MPs willing to rally to their colours as well but also offered the option of reverting to something akin to ‘Real’/’True’ Labour at a later date if Tory defectors do not materialise, which, as we’ve recently found out, they have.

Finally, although the initial band of seven explicitly referred to Mr Corbyn’s ‘handling of the Brexit issue’ as one of the key reasons why they had bolted from the Labour Party, they did not make support for a second referendum a compulsory element for membership of their section. This too is shrewd because there are many Labour MPs who are profoundly hostile to the Corbynistas but who are far from convinced that the best approach to Brexit from here is to press for another ballot rather than aiming for the softest Brexit that might be available such as the Norway Plus model.

A decent start does not mean that this experiment will take root. What are the key next questions?

Why now?

The biggest surprise about events this week is the timing. It would appear strange on the face of it that the now ex-Labour MPs did not wait until the end of the parliamentary skirmishes on Brexit to blame Mr Corbyn for betraying Labour MPs, members and voters by not throwing his weight behind the drive for a further referendum. Delaying the split would surely have encouraged more MPs to defect too?

Private conversations suggest three reasons why they decided to move early. The first was the concern that the Labour leadership might, come the potentially decisive series of votes now due in the House of Commons for the end of this month, and for entirely cynical and tactical reasons, have decided to allow Labour MPs to have a free vote on a second referendum, and that Mr Corbyn and Mr McDonnell might have voted for a second referendum purely to make subsequent departures from the Labour Party by alienated MPs harder to justify. They could have done this while allowing others in the pro-Corbyn camp and those MPs who represent strongly pro-Leave constituencies to do the opposite and doom the ‘peoples’ vote’ cause to a heavy defeat in Parliament.

Second, some of the initial seven are now convinced that ministers will compel Theresa May to extend Article 50 for what may prove to be several months if she cannot construct a majority for her Withdrawal Agreement. If so, waiting for Brexit to be resolved before creating a new political vehicle might have wasted quite a lot of time.

Finally, this move, while largely inspired by Brexit, is not exclusively triggered by Brexit. The two other crucial factors – the capture of the Labour Party’s organisation by Momentum and a willingness by the leadership to tolerate members of an anti-Semitic hue – have both reached a point of no-return as of February 2019 as far as many MPs are concerned, so why not act against it?

How many more?

The potential list of recruits from within the PLP is considerable. At least 50 Labour MPs are close to the Independent Group in sympathy and more than 100 more would allow them a hearing. It is far less likely that the tally of defectors from the Conservative Party could exceed a handful, beyond the three who announced their switch this morning. There is real tension between the pro-Brexit European Research Group of Conservative MPs and those who would much rather that the UK did not leave the EU, but the venom is nothing like that inside Labour.

How many more will actually leave depends on a number of factors. The first is how the electorate responds to the pioneer set of defectors which can only be registered through opinion polls as The Independent Group does not intend to contest any actual elections for some time (the earliest that they might do so is May 2020 but it could be later).

The second is how the Corbyn camp reacts to what has happened. Does it attempt to be conciliatory to the rest of the PLP or will it instead take a ‘Put Up or Shut Up’ approach in an effort to intimidate the potentially uneasy into staying? There might be a serious divide in instinct on this between the Corbynite loyalists in Parliament, who might be willing to sacrifice ideological purity to keep colleagues on board, and the wider Momentum tribe, which might relish the prospect of Labour MPs whom they would otherwise have to go through the cumbersome procedural machinery of de-selection in effect de-selecting themselves by departing.

The third element is the nature of political events other than Brexit or the Labour leadership, such as the economy, and whether the Independent Group can find compelling arguments to make on such matters. This is particularly true if they ultimately want to be a completely new centrist party force. What does the centre have to offer the UK in an age when populist positioning seems to hold sway?

To answer the question ‘how many more?’ directly is not straightforward. To do so indirectly, it seems reasonable to conclude that if by the Spring of 2020 there are not at least 15 ex-Labour MPs in their ranks then this adventure is probably destined to end in almost total failure. If the caucus by then is closer to 25 ex-Labour MPs then that is serious progress. If it rises to above 35 ex-Labour MPs then The Independent Group (or whatever name might emerge as a better label) would be larger than the SNP and would be entitled to its two questions at Prime Ministers’ Questions as well as other parliamentary privileges. If it hit 50 MPs by, say, May 2020, then the impact will be seismic.

What will the ultimate impact be?

That depends on the range of possible numbers set out in the last paragraph. Rather than dodging the issue by the mundane reply of ‘it depends’, a prediction of some sort (even if brave) should be put forward.

In this instance it is this. If by around May 2020 the number of MPs who have left the Parliamentary Labour Party has reached or exceeded 25 then the chances of what remains of the Labour Party winning an outright majority at the next election probably falls to 10% or under. If the number reached 50 MPs then you could cut the prospect of a PM Corbyn to 5% or less. The chances of that initial benchmark figure of 25 MPs being secured are probably more than 50%. This leaves us with the paradox that a section of MPs primarily motivated to abandon the Labour Party because of Brexit might well have more influence over the outcome of the next election than Brexit itself does.

Tim Hames
Director General, BVCA


×

Update your login details

We updated our website and supporting systems on 12th December. 

If you previously had an account, please reset your password. If it's your first-time logging in, please register to create an account. For assistance, please contact the BVCA Membership Team

Login