This is a sign of weakness, not strength. To suspend four MPs for rebellion suggests a lack of authority and a lack of nerve, not a sense of confidence. Bullying and threats are no way to manage a party, but a signal that Labour has lost control, with its crude methods in cutting winter fuel payments and its attempt to cut disability benefits. As MPs head off for the summer next week, Keir Starmer and the Labour whips hope they will be mulling over their futures, having been warned of the severe penalty for disloyalty. But I doubt that’s the message most will absorb.
More than 120 MPs signalled their opposition to the proposed welfare cuts, and many more agreed but didn’t sign the amendment. Was the solution to sack the lot? Or just the token “ringleaders”? In fact there were none, just a strong belief among backbenchers of all varieties that not only were the cuts wrong, they were badly done and would be politically damaging, as indeed they were. Those suspended are of the soft left, by no means Corbynites. Rachael Maskell is a bit of a moral grandstander, annoying other MPs by suggesting her conscience is clearer than theirs, but suspensions tend to play to those tendencies (though the four will find that once they are no longer representing Labour, they will lose their voice with broadcasters).
A Labour aide boasted gleefully that these “heads on spikes” were intended as a warning shot to the new intake of MPs not to rebel, but it sounds like petty revenge for their success in forcing the leadership into U-turns. Don’t even think of sacking Diane Abbott again: it didn’t work out well. She would be away in the Lords now had the party not blundered last time, making her dig in her heels very effectively.
Starmer is building quite a record for stamping down on dissent. He is the first prime minister to suspend the whip from MPs in his first month in power. In fact, during that first month, when he punished the seven who voted for an SNP motion to abolish the two-child benefit cap, he suspended more MPs than Tony Blair did during his decade in No 10, despite frequent rebellions. One senior Blair aide said Jeremy Corbyn wasn’t expelled even though “he voted more often against than for the government” (not strictly true, although he did vote against the government more than 400 times). I put that to a senior No 10 source, whose riposte was: “Well, Blair should have done! It would have saved us a lot of years in opposition.” Unlikely. If not Corbyn, it would have been someone else of his ilk.
Parties need discipline. How did Blair maintain it sufficiently, without expulsions? A Blair aide said he paid close attention to his backbenchers, holding a daily morning meeting with the chief whips Hilary Armstrong and Jackie Smith, and weekly meetings with a rotating roster of MPs including regular rebels – even Dennis Skinner – to test the contents of his speeches ahead of time.
Aides such as parliamentary private secretaries were delegated to nurture various groups of MPs – the women, the union supporters, the religious, the leftists, those with particular political issues or constituency concerns, those in marginals who kept their ears closest to the ground. If Blair disagreed with them, he said so and explained why. “Being listened to matters,” said the aide. But the whips weren’t supine or toothless. “They didn’t threaten but they could make MPs’ lives miserable,” the aide added, with measures such as denying pairing.
Things will get worse when MPs return from summer recess, with the autumn budget, the review of services for children with special educational needs and disabilities and a child poverty strategy that needs to rescind the two-child benefit cap, despite 60% of the public in favour of keeping it, including half of Labour voters.
There will be many more opportunities for conflict in the party. The problem is profound. This is not about a handful of usual suspects, but a deep unease about the direction of the government, or whether it even has a direction beyond a random collection of policies. Discipline only works if there is a strong story that defines where a government is heading and why. Too many MPs do not believe Starmer’s story, especially after the U-turns they forced seemed to send Labour in a better, more coherent direction. Here’s an example: it’s brilliant that Starmer announced on Thursday that Labour will lower the voting age to 16, but where’s the more radical constitutional reform?
MPs can get arrogant when they forget they owe everything to the party that selected, financed and organised for them. However talented or beloved they think they are, few manage to buck the trend of national swings. But that also makes them more anxious about the success of the national party. Many know they won’t be back after the next election, having won implausible seats by small majorities. The hailstorm of bad economic news in recent days depresses spirits: growth is lower than expected, inflation higher and unemployment up. “Give me lucky generals,” Napoleon is reputed to have said, but Rachel Reeves so far has not been one of them. Opinion polls are dismal, with Labour overtaken alarmingly by Reform UK. The summer holiday may be approaching, but the party’s MPs will go home glum.
The way to bring them back in better fettle in September is to sharpen Labour’s purpose, build on the best policies of the first year and stop making others that alienate supporters without gaining new ones. Listen to MPs. Remember Aesop’s fable of the north wind and the sun competing to make a man remove his cloak. The north wind fails when it blows with all its might because the man wraps his cloak tighter around him, but when the sun shines he takes it off in the heat. Persuasion works better than force.