Can Labour Trust the Liberal Democrats?
The biggest problem, from a Labour perspective, are the LibDems themselves. If we've learned anything these last 15 years, it's that this "progressive party" isn't that progressive when it comes to the crunch. They preferred to throw their hard-won electoral support into the burning oil drum when the Tories offered them a chance of ministerial office. And in power, if their party stayed the hands of Dave and Osborne at all there's very little evidence for it. More recently under the wise leadership of the blessed Jo Swinson, they saw putting the boot into a Labour Party bedevilled by paralysing faction fighting as their route to the big time without any wider considerations. Such as being more accepting of a Boris Johnson government and everything that entailed than a bit of social reform under Jeremy Corbyn. Given what has happened and their constitutionally snakish formation, would Labour be daft to trust them?
The answer depends on context. In some localities the LibDems present as very anti-Labour because the local council is run by Labour. And, unsurprisingly, are vociferous foes of the Tories in Tory-run areas. It will be forever thus for as long as the party persists. But right now, the vibes are more favourable for Labour's chances. As this place has long argued, local election results and council by-elections show that Tory voters are more likely to dump blue to go yellow - a point forcefully made by formerly safe Tory areas. It therefore makes sense to go after the Tories. That and it's the only place the LibDems can go: of their top 30 targets, 26 seats are held by the Tories and just two by Labour.
Additional to electoral realities, there are two other very good reasons why the LibDems are unlikely to do a 2010. Then, Gordon Brown was a busted flush and everyone knew it. Plus the position built up by Paddy Ashdown, Charles Kennedy, and Nick Clegg during the decade was on its opposition to Labour. They might have made a plausible argument that coming to an arrangement with Brown would have jettisoned its support just as well as their alliance with the Tories did. And, as far as they were concerned, Corbyn was so far beyond the pale to not even consider. But now Labour is in the process of being made safe for bourgeois politics again, electoral interests align with an affinity in the outlooks of both party leaderships. And lastly, there have been constructive relationships between the two parties for some time. The LibDems had the education portfolio in the Welsh Labour government until last year, and there are those not terribly quiet "informal" deals cut in last year's by-elections and in the upcoming Erdington contest not to do much campaigning and avoid harming each other. The de facto alliance, which Starmer said warm words about in December, is already operating.
This alliance can work, but it depends on the politics. Labour are going to have to do the heavy lifting and recent polls have reported significant slippages in the party's lead. Which isn't surprising as it's operating with a strategy of saying nothing apart from the most abysmal right wing positions. Like Angela Rayner's sudden enthusiasm for shoot-to-kill, for instance. A quiet compact with the LibDems makes things easier, but the question of winning and losing depends on the politics the party is peddling. And, at present, it's still doing all it can to repel its core constituency. Which, when Labour needs every vote in what will be a tight election, doesn't strike one as a terribly wise idea.
Image Credit