Throwing Stones in Glass Houses

Last Wednesday's PMQs saw a clash of the deputies. In fact, so many deputies were on duty that the poor MP for Blackpool South couldn't keep track of who was or wasn't a deputy. In spite of this less than senior turnout, important issues were still raised.

Deputising for Labour leader Mr Ed Miliband, Ms Harriet Harman challenged the Deputy Prime Minister Mr Clegg:

'For all the Right Hon. Gentleman’s bluster, the truth is that having five Liberal Democrats seated around the Cabinet table has made no difference whatsoever... and the Lib Dems are making no difference on unemployment, just as they are making no difference on the NHS.'

Those are sore issues for Liberal Democrat members. Up and down the country Lib Dem campaigners, councillors and candidates are trying to draw up responses to the difficult question that rises from that accusation - how can the party separate its achievements from the coalition to show its successes?

But what if we turn that question upon its head.

As per constitutional tradition, after the last election the Labour party was perfectly entitled to continue governing - either in minority or coalition government. But they chose to go to the opposition benches.

So it might also be asked of the Labour Party what it has accomplished in choosing the opposition benches.

That question holds many headaches for Labour - as many as Labour's questions cause the Lib Dems - because it's hard to come up with success stories. Senior figures in the party have been divided on the NHS, divided over the party's economic credibility (Whitehead, 2011), and the relations between the party and its Trade Union affiliates are souring by the day.

Since settling into opposition the party's aim has been on breaking the smaller of the coalition parties - however most of their attacks have been opportunistic and may very well backfire down the line.

Labour attempted to attack government housing policy as 'social cleansing', just to have it pointed out to them that it was Labour manifesto policy. The party successfully damaged Mr Clegg's reputation over tuition fees, yet in the long run will have to address the fact that the Labour party is intensely divided on that issue as well - with its main offered alternative being just another version of charging fees to students (Grice, 2010).

The Labour party is facing a number of serious problems, not least its lack of coherent agreed-upon policy. However they have been saved by the apparent unpopularity of the Conservative administration, its cuts program and the seeming public dissatisfaction with public officials handing over the reins of public services to the private sector.

Labour are winning the individual battles by using the bandwagon of the moment. Yet to win in the long haul they need to do more and reassure voters that they won't simply move into office and pick up where the coalition left off. This means taking the risk of having policy that can be scrutinised. But if Labour are to pick up seats against two governing parties - who will have, like them or not, policies successfully turned in action - it will be a necessity.

==========
References:
==========
+ Prime Minister's Question Time, 14 March 2011.

+ Decca Whitehead's 'Alistair Darling: "You can't just tell half the story and still be credible"'; in The Guardian; 8 September 2011.

+ Andrew Grice's 'Labour endorses graduate tax'; in The Independent; 12 November 2010.