Would a new leader be the answer to Labour’s woes? | Letters

Letters: Readers respond to articles by Zoe Williams and Clive Lewis about the party’s popularity crisis

Zoe Williams’s conjecture that pragmatism might be the solution to Labour’s polling woes is surely a triumph of hope over experience. (There is no denying Labour is in crisis – but in a strange way, Keir Starmer is equipped to save it, 12 March). Disavowal of ideology in favour of pragmatism is the precise cause of the apparent aimlessness and inability to convey Labour’s mission that she describes, compounded by unforced policy errors, U-turns and poor judgment. Labour members may well be discussing whether Keir Starmer should be tacking more to the left, but the underlying question remains whether he is the right person to lead a party that needs, as she says, a complete step change in orientation in the new multiparty environment.

Unlike Andy Burnham, for example, he has shown no interest in either proportional representation or cross-party collaboration to defeat the far right. The future of both the party and country are more important than the fate of any individual leader. With electoral disaster forecast for May, Labour MPs are increasingly likely to be considering that the best medicine for the party’s current malaise might be Starmer replacement therapy.
Dr Anthony Isaacs
London

• Zoe Williams asks the right questions, like how did Morgan McSweeney “come to be so indispensable”, and reaches sensible conclusions, such as if Labour wants to be the opposition to the hard right, “it has actually to oppose it”. She’s right about voters losing faith in Labour “since the genocide in Gaza”, but totally wrong in thinking that the “pragmatist” Keir Starmer is capable of turning Labour around. His political judgment, if it exists at all, is flawed, and too many of his decisions have to be reversed. He is basically unelectable, and has to be removed.

The new leader has to show “humility”, apologise both for complicity in the genocide and the Palestine Action debacle, sack Shabana Mahmood, and threaten sanctions against the state of Israel. Too many people, “Muslim and not”, as Williams says, “will never vote Labour again” unless these things happen. Does she really think that Starmer would even do one of them?
Bernie Evans
Liverpool

• Bravo to the Labour MP Clive Lewis (While people feel the foundations of their lives are shaking, this deep political crisis will continue, 8 March) for recognising the depth and strength of the political malaise that has been building in the UK and across the globe. Markets, private ownership/exploitation of natural monopolies, oligarchs/billionaires, markets, autocrats/dictators, climate change/green scam, markets, AI/deepfakes: these things conspire to make the citizenry, the electorate, feel powerless. That breeds cynicism, apathy, resentment, conspiracy theories, trolling, polarisation, hate.

And now, it seems, the Middle East in turmoil, the US political establishment losing any semblance of a moral compass and, together with the state of Israel, relishing its ability to kill adversaries anywhere with impunity.

Power needs to be redistributed in countries aspiring to democracy. The EU has a word for it: subsidiarity, the delegation of power to the lowest competent level (and the reduction of the overreach of the central authority). Messy, especially during transition, but relatable. Politics are worthwhile if you feel connection to them.
John Gatward
Thatcham, Berkshire

• Clive Lewis’s summary of Labour’s crisis captured the challenges well. As much as it saddens me, Labour is not committed to a centrally planned progressive economy and I no longer think that such an approach offers any appeal to today’s voters. So I wholeheartedly agree that increased devolution of powers to UK countries and regions offers the best “growing conditions” for progressive policies to take root. Being still uncertain about whether proportional representation is an answer, devolution can help ensure some finer-grain voting.
Richard Churcher
London

• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.