Labour figures dicussing ‘break clause’ for new leader
The extraordinary thing about this leadership contest is how many MPs seem genuinely undecided. And many people in the party are worrying that it’s simply too early, in 2015, to pick a leader for an election in 2020, five years away. Especially when they know that the Conservatives plan to replace their leader in a few years time, probably around 2018, after the In-Out Referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU.
What’s more, there seems to be general consensus that none of the candidates the party is now being offered is very appetising. None looks like the obvious solution to Labour’s many problems.
The questions are obvious. What if the new leader turns out to be not up to the job? What if some dazzling new potential figure emerges between now and 2020? What if the Tories pick a new leader who is so much better than ours, and needs a clear, more suitable response?
With the sudden and unexpected withdrawal of Chuka Umunna, an idea is rapidly gaining ground in the party of having a “break clause” in 2017 or 2018, after the EU Referendum. All it would take right, now, according to a senior member of the Shadow Cabinet, is for one of the leadership contenders to offer right now, that if he or she is elected, to put themselves up for a genuine re-election in two or three years time – a review moment, an opportunity for the party to renew their contract as it were, or to seek an alternative.
The beauty of such an offer it would help ensure Labour doesn’t get landed with a duff leader for the next five years. And it would also allow new contenders to be considered further down the road, some who may only just have been elected to Parliament, and people who may be more suited to the rapidly changing politics of the times.
Who knows, by 2018, Dan Jarvis or maybe even Chuka Umunna may feel the time is right. And it could mean that Labour has a new, fresh leader for 2020, not somebody who has been ground down by five years as Leader of the Opposition, which is often described as the hardest job in politics.
And as soon as one leadership contender offers party members such a “break clause” I suspect they will all be obliged to do so.