Another day, another Government reverse ferret. But one to celebrate, all the same. For the decision of Downing Street to abandon plans to postpone 30 council elections across England represents a triumph for democracy. Rejoice!
The government should never have got itself into this mess in the first place. There was no compelling political or logistical reason to delay the elections.
True enough, a major reorganisation of local government – one that itself constitutes an assault on democratic accountability – is on the cards, meaning that the affected councils may eventually be abolished, to be replaced by a raft of new “super councils”.
But that alone was never enough to justify denying millions of citizens their right to hold to account their existing representatives – many of whom have been in office for several years – and to decide whether or not they were worthy of a fresh mandate. That’s what the democratic principle is about, and politicians interfere with it at their peril.
This latest Government volte-face raises profound questions about judgement and process. What did ministers imagine the reaction might be to their decision to scrap the elections? Did they assume they wouldn’t face a sharp backlash, accusations of authoritarianism, or the risk of a legal challenge?
That they could get away with a manoeuvre more befitting of a banana republic than a developed democracy? And even when none other than the Electoral Commission had voiced its objections?
And why only now, at the eleventh hour and on the eve of a court challenge by Reform UK, has the government discovered that it doesn’t, after all, have a lawful basis on which to proceed?
Did it not seek legal advice right at the outset? If it did, what did that advice say? Was the advice duff (in which case the government should get new lawyers)? Or was it sound but ministers decided to ignore it and plough on regardless?
Either way, there are serious questions to be answered, for the whole debacle has cost a great deal of money and, as the Association of Electoral Administrators said yesterday, left councils facing an “uphill struggle” to run the elections on time.
Whatever the explanation, the optics are awful for the government. Ministers have painted themselves as a bunch of democracy deniers while allowing Nigel Farage to portray himself as the hero of the masses – a modern-day Chartist fighting for the ordinary person’s right to cast a vote.
Keir Starmer's banana republic manoeuvre just guaranteed a May massacre – Paul Embery | Keir Starmer's banana republic manoeuvre just guaranteed a May massacre – Paul Embery
What a nightmare scenario this is for Labour. As if things weren’t bad enough for the party, it must now try to persuade legions of electors heading to the polls at the local elections in May, and whom it didn’t think should be permitted to have a vote in the first place, that it is worthy of their support. Good luck with that!
The Labour leadership had better brace itself for a severe battering. Against the backdrop nationally of a sluggish economy, an immigration and asylum crisis, stubbornly high NHS waiting list numbers and an unabating housing crisis and having already betrayed its autocratic tendencies with the proposal to axe jury trials, there is much for voters to be angry about. The ceaseless U-turns serve only to fuel public dissatisfaction.
In the end, all governments need to convey a sense of basic competence in their management of the affairs of the nation. Even governments – such as the Margaret Thatcher administration in the 1980s – that divide opinion sharply may still win the grudging respect of opponents if they are at least able to demonstrate they have a grip over events.
After its latest unforced error, the current Labour government is more and more giving the impression that it cannot execute the basic functions of office. And that is a failing that voters simply won’t be prepared to forgive.
More From GB News