One of the most quoted pieces of folk wisdom is that “voters don’t like divided parties”.
The implication is that a political party which can’t keep its own house in order is unlikely to be trusted to run the country.
This month epic disunity has been on display in both the government and the opposition.
Bitter divisions have become almost routine among Conservative MPs, as they have dethroned and installed five leaders and prime ministers in just eight years.
Division in Tory ranks has undoubtedly been an electoral asset for Labour, helping to explain its massive lead in opinion polls. Now there are fears on the opposition side that heartfelt disagreements over the man-made humanitarian crisis in the Middle East could start pulling down Labour as well.
Suella Braverman slashed back at Rishi Sunak with a diatribe which included the phrases “uncertain”, “weak”, irresponsibility”, “magical thinking”, “betrayal” and “manifestly and repeatedly failed to deliver”.
More on Jess Phillips
Related Topics:
It was sharpened with the ominous wake-up call that Sunak was “rejected by a majority of party members during the summer leadership contest” and therefore had “no personal mandate to be prime minister”.
Two outspoken female Conservative MPs – Miriam Cates and Dame Andrea Jenkyns – added to the tension by asking for a ballot to express no confidence in Sunak.
Advertisement
Image: Braverman lashed out at the PM in a letter published after she was sacked
Some 40 Tory MPs stirred up the internal party debate further by putting their names to a parliamentary measure paving the way to Braverman’s preferred cause of resiling from the European Convention on Human Rights.
Meanwhile, Sir Keir Starmer suffered the worst parliamentary rebellion since he was elected Labour leader in 2020.
Some 56 of his MPs defied the party whip to vote for an immediate ceasefire in the conflict between Israel and Hamas.
The Labour revolt was a token gesture on a matter of principle. In practice, it could not change what happens in the Middle East.
Neither the Israeli nor Hamas leadership will take any notice of what the opposition in the British parliament is saying about their conduct of war. Especially since the ceasefire amendment, put forward by the SNP, was heavily defeated by 293 to 125.
In keeping with the dreadful death toll in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, the mood in the Labour Party is sombre but free of the mutual recriminations so prevalent in Conservative ranks.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:27
Jess Phillips quits Labour frontbench
Shadow cabinet members were making no secret of their distress at talented colleagues sacrificing potential future ministerial careers.
For senior figures it is not the first time they have confronted divided loyalties.
For example, in 2005 Tony Blair suffered a major defeat when the Commons rejected his attempt to introduce 90-day detention for terror suspects.
The punishment for some Labour rebels was five years’ purgatory for their ministerial ambitions.
In spite of his disciplinarian reputation, Starmer has not so far been so strict as Blair.
Four of the middle-ranking ministers who quit on Wednesday only got the chance to do so because they were reinstated after previously rebelling in October 2020 against authorisation for so-called undercover “spy cops” to break the law.
Labour’s revolt might have been bigger if members of the shadow cabinet did not have more than a whiff of general election victory and real power in their nostrils. Few want to miss out on a share in that.
They also know that it is important to send out the signal to the electorate that they are united and ready to share the burdens of office, including difficult decisions.
John Healey, the shadow defence secretary, put his finger on this in his media round on Thursday, repeatedly stressing: “We are behaving as we would in government, we are not a protest movement.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:59
Labour is ‘not a protest party’ says MP John Healey
The New Labour government’s decision to go to war in Iraq has long haunted the party because of the failure to find weapons of mass destruction and its disastrous consequences in the region.
Ironically Starmer has now got his party into a similar state of agreeing to disagree on the current Middle East controversy – close to the Conservative position, but without the passion and internal party strife.
Back in March 2003, the vote to “use all means necessary to ensure the disarmament of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction” was genuinely consequential.
Prime Minister Blair had committed to be bound by the outcome, even though he was not legally obliged to secure backing from parliament before entering a war.
Image: Starmer is yet to be as strict as former Labour PM Blair
His government prevailed, by 412 to 125, only thanks to Tory party support. Eighty-four Labour MPs rebelled. Two ministers, Robin Cook and Clare Short, resigned from the cabinet.
Fallout from the Iraq invasion lay behind Labour’s move to the left in the 2010s.
A war-weary Ed Miliband broke with defence bipartisanship to inflict one of the major foreign policy setbacks of David Cameron’s premiership, by defeating the PM’s call to punish President Bashar al Assad militarily for the use of chemical weapons in Syria.
In 2015, Jeremy Corbyn, a prominent member of the Stop the War Coalition, was elected party leader.
In this decade Starmer has taken Labour in the opposite direction. His no-tolerance approach to perceived left-wing antisemitism resulted in the suspension of Corbyn and his close allies Diane Abbott and Andy McDonald, so disbarring them from standing again as Labour candidates.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer faced a revolt from the frontbench but his shadow cabinet remains intact
The resignations over a ceasefire mean that there are now no members of the Socialist Campaign Group in Starmer’s campaign team.
It is possible that disagreement over Israel-Hamas could turn into a debilitating sore in the Labour Party.
It is more likely that internal arguments will be overtaken by events. Key UK allies, including the US and France, are pressurising Israel to show restraint while, by some analyses, it could complete its military objectives in a matter of weeks.
In her resignation letter, former shadow Home Office minister Jess Phillips spoke for many of the Labour MPs who backed the ceasefire amendment, saying “I must vote with my constituents, my head, and my heart” but she stressed she did not feel she was rebelling against Starmer.
Rebelling may make it easier locally for some of the 56 to retain their seats at the election.
Image: Phillips will no longer serve as a shadow minister – but may more easily retain her seat
This could offset the handful of constituencies – such as in Bristol and Brighton – where Labour’s more moderate official stance could cost it support to the Greens.
In all, the impact of Labour’s disagreement has been modest so far.
Older, more centrist voters may be attracted by Starmer’s resistance to pro-Palestinian pressure. In polls taken since the conflict broke out, two-thirds of Muslim voters are continuing to support Labour and the party’s lead in voting preference is still around 20%.
Meanwhile Braverman’s histrionics and the consequent cabinet reshuffle have distracted public attention from Labour’s agonising over the marches and the ceasefire vote.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Tory MPs, including party officials and former cabinet ministers, are continuing to argue the toss openly with each other over a wide range of policy and personnel issues.
The voters appear to have registered the different levels of disunity in both parties.
An Opinium poll this month asked whether voters agreed or disagreed that the parties were united.
Labour’s ratings were down significantly from a month earlier, from a net positive of +12 to -8.
Unsurprisingly polling for the Conservatives, who are not divided over Gaza, changed less since October.
For them the damage of disunity has already been done elsewhere on other matters. The Conservative Party’s net disunity rating worsened by just three points this month to an Arctic chill of -43.
The chancellor has said she was having a “tough day” yesterday in her first public comments since appearing tearful at Prime Minister’s Questions – but insisted she is “totally” up for the job.
Rachel Reeves told broadcasters: “Clearly I was upset yesterday and everyone could see that. It was a personal issue and I’m not going to go into the details of that.
“My job as chancellor at 12 o’clock on a Wednesday is to be at PMQs next to the prime minister, supporting the government, and that’s what I tried to do.
“I guess the thing that maybe is a bit different between my job and many of your viewers’ is that when I’m having a tough day it’s on the telly and most people don’t have to deal with that.”
She declined to give a reason behind the tears, saying “it was a personal issue” and “it wouldn’t be right” to divulge it.
“People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday. Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job,” she added.
More on Rachel Reeves
Related Topics:
Ms Reeves also said she is “totally” up for the job of chancellor, saying: “This is the job that I’ve always wanted to do. I’m proud of what I’ve delivered as chancellor.”
Image: Reeves was seen wiping away tears during PMQs. Pic: PA
Asked if she was surprised that Sir Keir Starmer did not back her more strongly during PMQs, she reiterated that she and the prime minister are a “team”, saying: “We fought the election together, we changed the Labour Party together so that we could be in the position to return to power, and over the past year, we’ve worked in lockstep together.”
PM: ‘I was last to appreciate’ that Reeves was crying
The chancellor’s comments come after the prime minister told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby that he “didn’t appreciate” that she was crying behind him at Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday because the weekly sessions are “pretty wild”, which is why he did not offer her any support while in the chamber.
He added: “It wasn’t just yesterday – no prime minister ever has had side conversations during PMQs. It does happen in other debates when there’s a bit more time, but in PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang. That’s what it was yesterday.
“And therefore, I was probably the last to appreciate anything else going on in the chamber, and that’s just a straightforward human explanation, common sense explanation.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:03
Starmer explains to Beth Rigby his reaction to Reeves crying in PMQs
During PMQs, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch branded the chancellor the “human shield” for the prime minister’s “incompetence” just hours after he was forced to perform a humiliating U-turn over his controversial welfare bill, leaving a “black hole” in the public finances.
The prime minister’s watered-down Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill was backed by a majority of 75 in a tense vote on Tuesday evening – but a total of 49 Labour MPs voted against the bill, which was the largest rebellion in a prime minister’s first year in office since 47 MPs voted against Tony Blair’s lone parent benefit in 1997, according to Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary University.
Reeves looks transformed – but this has been a disastrous week for the PM
It is a Rachel Reeves transformed that appears in front of the cameras today, nearly 24 hours since one of the most extraordinary PMQs.
Was there a hint of nervousness as she started, aware of the world watching for any signs of human emotion? Was there a touch of feeling in her face as the crowds applauded her?
People will speculate. But Ms Reeves has got through her first public appearance, and can now, she hopes, move on.
The prime minister embraced her as he walked on stage, the health secretary talked her up: “Thanks to her leadership, we have seen wages rising faster than the cost of living.”
A show of solidarity at the top of government, a prime minister and chancellor trying to get on with business.
But be in no doubt today’s speech on a 10-year-plan for the NHS has been overshadowed. Not just by a chancellor in tears, but what that image represents.
A PM who, however assured he appeared today, has marked his first year this week, as Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby put to him, with a “self-inflicted shambles”.
She asked: “How have you got this so wrong? How can you rebuild trust? Are you just in denial?”
They are questions Starmer will be grappling with as he tries to move past a disastrous week.
Ms Reeves has borne a lot of the criticism over the handling of the vote, with some MPs believing that her strict approach to fiscal rules has meant she has approached the ballooning welfare bill from the standpoint of trying to make savings, rather than getting people into work.
Ms Badenoch also said the chancellor looked “absolutely miserable”, and questioned whether she would remain in post until the next election.
Sir Keir did not explicitly say that she will, and Ms Badenoch interjected to say: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”
Downing Street scrambled to make clear to journalists that Ms Reeves was “going nowhere”, and the prime minister has since stated publicly that she will remain as chancellor “for many years to come”.