Campaigns aren't meant to be career suicide

More dark days lay ahead for Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May (Image: politicshome.com)

I love a good publicity stunt. Being in the PR industry for over six years, I've been involved in a few myself. Doing them gives me the urge in wanting to do more, and create an even bigger impact as the previous one had. But with these stunts (or campaigns), you get two primary types of reactive sounds from the vocal public - either an 'ooh', or 'ugh'.

With that in mind, you can imagine my reaction when I heard about two campaigns launched this past week or so - one to do with a cross-bench rebellion to form a new political movement and the other about a girl's vision to return back to the UK after four years in Syria with notorious terrorism group ISIS (or whatever they call themselves).

I'd like to start analysing the first story I mentioned here. The rumours had been rife, over the past couple of years, of certain MPs not being happy with the direction their party leadership headed, it was just the matter of who and when these changes were going to take place. Now at least eight Labour MPs have said 'enough is enough', joined forces and formed 'The Independent Group'. Their reasoning was clear; they were sick of the Corbynista movement which had gotten them fearing for their lives due to their faith or position on Europe. They expressed so during their press conference launch, showing solidarity as a way of showing how serious they were.

Their impact is working, somewhat. Three Conservative MPs have joined them, taking a stand against the Tory policy on Europe, fearing it has taken the party to the 'right'. If the new group can convince a handful more politicians, they'll soon be the fourth largest party in the UK, behind the parties in red and blue, as well as SNP.

These eleven MPs have one common ground - they're all against Britain leaving the European Union which, as it stands, is set to happen in just over four weeks' time. Instantly, the group rivals the Liberal Democrats who have held the so-called 'centre' for a long time, but with little influence. The aim of this movement is to bridge the current political divide in a way the Lib Dems couldn't execute to the best effect.

The Independent Group members (Image: BBC News)

I have respect for each of the MPs who made their decisions to breakaway, and I can completely understand their frustrations. It has been proven overtime that Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn are ineffective in leading. I've resisted saying this for so long, but their ignorance is getting annoying now. May is doing a lot of listening, and not listening, at the same time, and is succumbing to a corner of her party, making most of her other colleagues uncomfortable. Corbyn faces a similar scenario as too many of his loyal supporters love to put his name to anything anti-Semitic online, and he's utterly powerless to stop it (there is a way he can*).

However, to me, forming a new party - or group - is career suicide. If all goes to May's plan, by Friday 29th March, UK ceases their membership of the EU. A primary focus of this movement is to stop that from happening. Their objective to exist could be thrown out of the window within weeks.

Then we look outside of the European debate. The Tories and Labour have often fought against each other on matters concerning public services, the economy, taxation and the benefits system. If you compare the voting records of Chuka Umunna and Heidi Allen for instance, the differences of opinion on key policy areas, including opening academy schools and welfare spending, is very much there. How will this affect their working relationship in the months to come? The impact of these MPs leaving their parties is obviously poignant in the short term, but this could be thrown back at their faces by the summer. And I highly doubt the parties they resigned from will welcome them back if their ambitions go to pot.

I would love these MPs to prove me wrong. But to do that, the first thing they need to do is change that woeful group name. You can't be an 'independent' and a 'group' at the same utterance. In politics, it doesn't make sense. It just sounds like a wannabe accountancy firm from the 1990s.

One thing this story has done is to relegate the government's negotiations in Brussels to third or fourth in the news agenda. The second circles around 19-year-old Shamima Begum. The teenager first grabbed the headlines four years ago when she was spotted heading towards a plane bound to Syria, joining forces with the terrorist organisation commonly known as ISIS.

I remember the anger this particular story caused when it all kicked off back in 2015. She was seen as a traitor, radicalised at 15 and an enemy to the UK's values. As I write this, she is at a refugee centre in Syria, wanting to return back to Britain with her new-born baby. One of the reasons behind her decision on this is no doubt down to the downgrading threat ISIS poses to the world. Their control over parts of Syria and Iraq has all but evaporated. Many non-fighters in support of the terrorist group have nowhere to go.

Shamima Begum (Image: BBC News)

But Shamima Begum's return plea has been met with severe backlash from those who feel she is too dangerous to walk on British streets, hence why she is becoming increasingly vocal. She was conveniently found by a journalist from The Times newspaper. I say 'conveniently' because it is clear she and her
protégés wanted to launch some sort of campaign to return home and by an influential and trusted title finding her, they took that golden opportunity. It is working to their favour, somewhat, as this high profile case has gotten the government to react. Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, has used his platform to say Begum isn't permitted to return home. This is only going to encourage her to up the ante. However, I suggest she keeps quiet from now on, as she is showing her naivety continuing to override her intellect, and that will only make her objective more impossible to achieve. She's laying in a bed which she'll never be able to get out of, unless she changes tact, and dramatically.

That said, I find myself in the minority by thinking she should return to the UK. If she is as dangerous as the government suggests, we should keep close tabs on her. It will cost more to leave her be, than to have her on tight surveillance - and not just financially. Javid suggested Bangladesh should have her, because that's where her parents are from - but they said they'll reject any such application. By leaving her to her own devices, it could give her the freedom to form her own terrorist movement. In that case, blood will be on Mr Javid's hands if she gets into trouble once more. I don't want supporters of terrorism anywhere in the world, but to prevent more attacks from happening, let's keep an eye on every suspect.

* - Here's a new way Corbyn can stop racism poisoning the Labour Party:

Putting my PR cap on, I find it baffling how Corbyn insists he's combatting racism in his party when every other report contradicts that. He can change this, of course, with subtle changes to the membership system. It's something the Conservatives can implement when they try and combat Islamophobia within their party, once they get round to it.

Labour is losing the social media battle. They won it in 2017 during the general election, but the party is being exposed to bile individuals are producing in their name. It is difficult for them to get rid of these posts themselves. As I argue in my last blog post on social media protection, Labour will not have the time to proactively go through each Twitter or Facebook post and check if these users happen to be a member of their organisation, and it's unrealistic of people to think this should happen. Instead, Labour can do something bigger and better.

Firstly, they can contact every single member and make it compulsory to provide their social media handles so that any direct complaints they receive related to such platforms, would be easily investigated and appropriate action taken. If members do not provide their social media details, Labour must mull over simple options - either investigate these individuals further or work closely with Twitter and the like to ensure their members aren't lying - IP addresses are traced at such a rapid pace nowadays.

If anything, they could have a membership layer system where it's publicly known who are; 1) members who provided social media handles and are 'clean', 2) members who provided social media handles and are under investigation, 3) revoked members who provided social media handles and guilty of inappropriate remarks, 4) affiliate members with no public social media accounts. Social media is dominating political discussions so membership systems should start adapting to this reality.

Labour can gloat about their impressive membership numbers all they like. However, they need to practice what they preach when it comes to ridding racism. In the meantime, to those offended by comments from supposed supporters of any party, complaining about it in 280 characters won't achieve anything.