Talking to Labour: the only news is that Labour still aren’t serious

Talks of all sorts happen between different parties all the time, varying from the personal – such as a few quiet words over handling the consequences of a death in an MP’s family – to the national interest – especially on security matters – and including, of course, the political manoeuvring.

One rule however applies consistently across them all: if you’re serious about discreet talks, you keep them discreet. Talking at length to the media, whether on or off the record, about talks is only what you do if the talks are out in the public (such as the Cook-Maclennan talks in the run-up to the 1997 election) or if you are wanting to stitch up the other side.

It’s a lesson some Liberal Democrats learnt the hard way from Gordon Brown before 2010, and one fallout from Brown’s crude machinations was to help persuade many senior Liberal Democrats that no post-election deal with Brown could have stuck, even if their instinct was to prefer a deal with Labour to the Tories.

Since 2010 there have been various discreet talks between Labour and the Liberal Democrats on a variety of matters, ranging more widely than constitutional reform. The news therefore in the Sunday Telegraph about “senior Liberal Democrats in secret talks” is a story that could have been run at any time over the past year or so.

The one significant element in it is the extended anonymous quote from “a Labour source”. That’s not what you do if you are serious about such talks. Take your pick whether you go for the simple explanation – that it shows how Labour are just happy to stitch up the Lib Dems – or the more conspiratorial – that someone in Labour is deliberately trying to wreck the talks by undermining trust.

Either way, it means the news is that Labour still isn’t serious about dealing with other parties other than on the basis of treating them with the same condescension and crassness as Gordon Brown did. It’s not the act of a smart party committed to pluralism.