Cancelling Tom Watson

In his usual disingenuous way on Radio 4 this morning, he called on the members to decide his fate, knowing full well there is no mechanism to recall him and there being as much a chance of refreshing his mandate as, um, him deciding to refresh his mandate. And we all know why: he would lose. Like many others I voted for Tom Watson in 2015, stupidly and naively thinking his battles with Murdoch might mean he'd be more outward facing and combative versus the Tories. This despite living in the WestMids and seeing shenanigans and dirty tricks performed by the regional office at his behest. As Watson has broken the terms on which he was elected in word and deed, if there was a shred of decency about him he'd tender his resignation.
There is no such decency.
One of the most frustrating aspects of the Corbyn project is its conciliationism. Initially, Jeremy was right to try and forge a shadow cabinet formed out of the differing wings of the party. As a general rule, talent has to sit with factional balance, and giving your opponents to buy-in is a trusted way of keeping them on-side. But after a year of scabbing, counter-briefing and guerilla warfare culminating in the failed coup, keeping these cretins happy should have ended there and then. No more favours, no more olive branches. The left had the opportunity to sweep wide and sweep hard with Stakhanovite enthusiasm following after the election: then was the time to make the necessary changes. Instead, Corbyn proved magnanimous in victory, which was paid back by MPs in the cynical exploitation of anti-semitism and using Brexit as a wedge between Corbyn supporters and the leadership's attempts to pull politics back to other burning questions. Sometimes, literally burning.
Why now then, why make the move against Watson after filleting Labour Students? Well, nothing breeds success like success. A double blow against the Labour right while their main support base, the parliamentary party, are facing reselections. Which, it's worth noting, makes Twitter threats of a leadership contest in response nothing but bluster. Timing then was important, and would be long forgotten in the build up to an election a couple of months hence. How about the suggestion of the left's weakness? The argument goes that some in Corbynism's upper echelons fear defeat at the next general election, whenever it arrives, and this is about getting all the left's ducks in a row in time for the next leadership contest. Possibly. Then again, the left does need a succession plan come what may, whether Labour is defeated at the next election and Jeremy steps down or after a successful period of government. The fear has to be the annoying appeal someone like Keir Starmer has for the softer end of Corbynism, the part of the movement who, despite everything, feel the pull back to how things were when politics was "safer". Faced with the likelihood of him becoming leader next, the left's revolution has to be made permanent should he try unpicking it. Which he will.
Ultimately though, while Lansman and Unite backed away and are content with the compromise motion, what this episode underlines again is the historic weakness of the Labour right. When Labour Students was cast into the abyss parliamentary alumnus of its ranks cried publicly and made threats, but nothing was forthcoming. Another prop of the right was annihilated. And had the bombing run on Watson released its payload, they'd have complained to the papers, on condition of anonymity of course, and that would be that. No splits, no action, plenty of chuntering, but uneasy quiescence as MPs attend their trigger ballots.
Despite all this, my fear is the left will rue the day the move against Watson wasn't followed through. Sharp pain now would, in all likelihood, avoid torture later on. Instead, and not for the first time, the hardest, most pitted road has been chosen.
Image Credit
Comments
Post a Comment