United Kingdom

Last edited Fri Feb 22, 2019, 11:50 AM - Edit history (1)

The splitters come pre-split!

I think this was the danger of identifying as a "group" (let alone a party in the making) so early on. It seems like a tactic that might have worked with the larger numbers originally envisaged (assuming the article I quoted above is right), though the predominance of ex-Labour figures would likely have put off joiners from any other parties, but is in danger of proving a damp squib that could occupy ground that might be better occupied by different initiatives.

But with only an initial 7, then what some in the media have been projecting as a trickle of defectors over the next few weeks (shades of the trickle effect attempted when there were a number of sequential resignations in the early moves to depose Corbyn), with the possibility of much more major moves if no deal does come about, it's having a different effect. I'm glad, at least, that pressure's finally being applied to both May and Corbyn.

It might have been more effective at this stage for the IGers to resign their party whips and dare their parties to expel them, keeping their powder dry. That may be what some who haven't made any moves yet have in mind (given that the whips don't seem to be holding anyway!).

Still, the IG is going to have a place on the next BBC Question Time panel, so that may give some satisfaction to the "Leslie-Umunna faction".

I do think a big hitter with an engaging media manner like Ken Clarke making a move would create a whole new ball game (heaven help me, I'd never have envisaged seeing him as a voice of sanity). Whether he could tolerate the company and egos in the IG is another matter!