Ed needs some New Year resolutions

---

Parliamentary researcher and Labour party member Alex Bryce recalls the events of 2010 and considers the future for his party and its new leader.

Looking back at the political headlines from New Year's Eve 2009 feels like harking back nostalgically to the good old pre-coalition days before the so-called 'new politics' and the 'Big Society'.

How did we ever get by without them?

This was a time before the cuts, before the riots and before Sayeeda Warsi became a cabinet minister.

Back then Nick Clegg was still popular, if not taken entirely seriously, Gordon Brown (remember him?) was still aggressively clinging on to power and David Cameron was starting to look like a prime minister in waiting.

The headlines on December 31st 2009 show us how much has changed in the last year.

In the Guardian we had Gordon Brown's New Year podcast feebly promising a "decade of shared prosperity"; in the Independent Barry Sherman was calling for the beleaguered prime minister's head; ditto Charles Clarke in the Telegraph, though similar stories could probably have been found on at least one media outlet on at least half of the days Brown spent in No 10.

All I could find on Nick Clegg was a reaffirmation in the Yorkshire Post that the Liberal Democrats would abolish tuition fees.

How the times have changed.

The 2010 general election was notable because Labour performed slightly above expectations but were ousted from power.

The Lib Dems, initially buoyed by the "I agree with Nick" TV debates, failed to increase their numbers in parliament but still managed to secure government jobs for almost half of their MPs.

The Tories did not successfully meet their own expectations and were unable to win enough MPs to command a majority in the House of Commons.

With no clear winner, tense negotiations between the three parties ensued and until a resolution was reached.

Gordon Brown, the true servant of the people that he is, remained at the helm of government, like a benevolent, unelected dictator.

Rumours and first-hand reports from the coalition talks suggested the Liberal Democrats initially attempted to forge links with Labour but Gordon Brown's insistence on staying put was a major stumbling block.

I suspect that this was like little more than an attempt to placate concerned MPs and activists and to take a swipe at Labour and the outgoing prime minister.

In fairness, any attempt to forge a coalition of the losers would have been electorally disastrous for Labour and may have ensured that we were wiped out at the next election.

The irony for the Lib Dems is that they were presented with an opportunity, unique in their recent history, to have a real influence and actually be represented in government – which is surely the goal of a political party – but in doing so they have potentially signed the death warrant for their party.

I don't blame the Lib Dems for going into coalition with the Tories - it is unrealistic and unreasonable to criticise them for doing so – but they have so spectacularly mismanaged the situation.

The coalition deal seems to so favour the Tories to such an extent that I can't think of one thing that the Lib Dems should be proud of.

The only sop they have to offer their disillusioned backbenchers and activists is a referendum which seems bound to fail on an electoral system that they don't really want.

Cameron is reported to be concerned about Clegg's unpopularity.

We might expect a whole host of warm, festive announcements fronted by Clegg, giving people the chance to once again remember why they agreed with Nick in the first place – even if that agreement did only last for a few hours after each TV debate.

Vince Cable on the other hand has looked deeply uncomfortable at the best of times, even before the recent highly-damaging spat about his 'war' with Rupert Murdoch.

It seems the Lib Dems are being asked by Cameron to openly support policies which they explicitly opposed and criticised less than six months ago.

This Lib Dem bashing is all a bit too easy these days and isn't as much fun as it used to be.

Labour MPs have certainly had fun with them since the election, but the time has come to focus on the Tories once again.

Even if Labour won every seat from the Liberal Democrats they would only have a majority of nine over the Tories.

I suspect that the electorate will eventually want to see more from the only real opposition party in 2011.

It will be a tough year for Ed Miliband, who is still trying to emerge from the shadow of his brother and establish his authority over restless and impatient Labour MPs.

Some of the hardcore David Miliband supporters still blame Gordon Brown for the election defeat and saw David as the one to rescue the party and return to its pre-Brown days.

Instead they have his brother who was more closely associated with the Brown camp and they don't see him as a break from the immediate past.

The reality is that the reasons for Labour's defeat in 2010 can be traced much further back, many were there before Brown became prime minister.

Even with a change at the top or an early election, or a better manifesto, the best the party could have hoped for was narrowly holding on for another term which may have resulted in 1997 scale disaster at the following election.

It is not ideal for the Tories to come to power at a time when there is no money to spend and cutting the deficit is absolutely necessary.

From a political point of view it will be very difficult for them to avoid alienating large sections of the public, as they have already done with students, and it won't be possible to use the Lib Dems as shields for every policy.

Labour MPs should be more patient and be aware that returning to power at the next election may not be either realistic or desirable.

They should take the opportunity to become an effective and united opposition, with a full programme for government, before expecting voters to give them another chance.

Ed Miliband may not become prime minister, but he is performing fairly well and has the potential to lead the party with distinction.

Developing a comprehensive set of policies will take time and throughout the process he will be criticised by opponents and colleagues alike for not having any, but opposition is a time for policy reflection, party reorganisation and reform and then, and only then, preparation for government.

Ed Miliband's New Year's resolution should be to think of one big policy or party reform - perhaps the voting system which elected him - to lay bold foundations for his leadership.

He also needs to change the focus of his party's opposition from the Lib Dems to the Tories who are, at the moment, being given a very easy ride by Labour.

Next year could be the decisive one for coalition, particularly given the recent revelations which will undoubtedly fuel Christmas speculation about whether it will hold together until the next election.

2011 will be a challenging year for Ed Miliband but, I suspect, he will be able to console himself by the fact that he is not Nick Clegg.

Alex Bryce is a parliamentary researcher for a Labour MP.