Authenticity is the key to Labour defeating the new insurgents

by Jonathan Todd

Labour is about to throw away a winnable election, according to Phil Collins’ latest fiery column, because its leader cannot fathom that he needs to convince us he will take care of our money. As a consistent Uncut theme, we cannot be accused of not being forthright in stressing this need. We are eager to avoid Labour falling short in public estimation of whether the party is capable of taking the tough decisions on public spending that closing the deficit requires.

While winning economic credibility should remain a Labour priority and I’ve written in the current Progress magazine on how this might be done, it may be that a perceived dearth of authenticity, rather than economic credibility, is the most immediate cause of a heightened risk that Labour will not form the next government. The calculus of this risk is informed by the likelihood of Labour losing votes and seats to the SNP in Scotland, UKIP in the north of England and the Greens across the UK.

These parties all lump Labour together with the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats and dismiss them as “all the same”. Labour is supposedly another chip off this venal and failing block. The SNP and the Greens unambiguously pitch to the left of Labour and UKIP go after traditional Labour supporters.

All Labourites are appalled by the idea that we are no better than the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats and bristle at the suggestion that we have left behind working class communities and left-wing values. But the worrying reality is that the Greens, SNP and UKIP – the new insurgents – successfully trade on these terms. As well as improving opinion poll performance, the new insurgents are all thought to be attracting new members at a rate that other parties appear able only to envy.

This success would not occur if Labour were more widely taken to be an authentic version of what we self-define as: the best vehicle for the advancement of left-wing values and working class interests. Alex Massie recently compared Scottish Labour to Rangers FC. Labour claims, like those of Rangers FC, that We are the People are now not just disbelieved but mocked. UKIP are seeking to inspire a similar kulturkampf among the English working class. They peddle the notion that the party founded to represent this class no longer does, as the Greens propagate the idea that a leader who has explicitly repudiated New Labour throughout his leadership is not really left wing.

Ed Miliband’s identification with the excluded, according to a powerful column by Deborah Orr over the weekend, doesn’t come across as authentic. In contrast, Paul Routledge on the Prospect website describes northern UKIP supporters speaking of Nigel Farage with clearly authentic warmth. If Miliband does not come across as what he says he is, if he seems inauthentic, he leaves himself vulnerable to the new insurgents. If Miliband instead is to be taken as authentic, he’ll need to show, not tell us who he is. Miliband might have told us in his speech last week but John McTernan revisited the importance of showing, not telling in his response to it.

Greens have never known a Climate Secretary superior to Miliband, while he has had affinity with those that life has dealt a tough hand, who the SNP and UKIP argue Labour has distanced from, since his days at Haverstock School. The real Ed Miliband is not someone who should not be vulnerable to seepage of support to his left or on climate change. He needs to find a way to show this person to those attracted by the new insurgents.

He needs to do so, however, without vacating the political centre. The battle for economic credibility will be fought on this terrain. Labour should seek to win enough economic credibility to defeat the Conservatives in this battle, while also recovering sufficient authenticity to rebuff the new insurgents. Sound economic management, the currency of economic credibility, is not an alternative to advancing left wing values, improving working class conditions or tackling climate change. It is a means to these ends, which the new insurgents now purport to provide the best route to.

If Labour loses further support to the new insurgents, then Andrew Lilico’s scenario of the Conservatives winning on 32 per cent increases in plausibility. Given the vagaries of the electoral system, an even smaller popular vote than this for Labour might return us as the largest party. Which means reversing loss of support to new insurgents could be vital to determining whether Labour forms the next government.

But holding this support will not be enough by itself to secure a popular vote large enough to deliver a strong mandate for change under a Miliband government. That will require commanding the political centre by strengthening Labour’s economic credibility. Which means it is just as well that the real Ed Miliband – in addition to being someone who should be attractive to those in danger of being seduced by the new insurgents – lectured on economics at Harvard University.

Jonathan Todd is Deputy Editor of Labour Uncut


Tags: , , , , ,


12 Responses to “Authenticity is the key to Labour defeating the new insurgents”

  1. Madasafish says:

    I am confused . Where to start?

    This success would not occur if Labour were more widely taken to be an authentic version of what we self-define as: the best vehicle for the advancement of left-wing values and working class interests.”

    Any party largely led by: the rich, those who are professional politicians and a sprinkling of key posts occupied by privately educated people – cannot be taken as representing the general populace let alone the “working class” . (Tories and LibDems and UKIP are no better)

    that will require commanding the political centre by strengthening Labour’s economic credibility. “

    Too right. But any party with Ed Balls as Shadow Chancellor has a millstone, an albatross and a London bus round its neck on that score.

    Which means it is just as well that the real Ed Miliband – in addition to being someone who should be attractive to those in danger of being seduced by the new insurgents – lectured on economics at Harvard University.

    Hmm. Ed’s competence in economic matters is as clear as his appeal generally to voters.. lack lustre at best.. And “lectured” does not equate to “doing” .

    Greens have never known a Climate Secretary superior to Miliband,

    Oh yes? Stupidly high tariffs on home solar power, windmills not connected to the Grid so they are paid to do nothing .. and a commitment to cut CO2 levels which was clearly unachievable without nuclear power whilst ordering no nuclear power stations…

  2. BenM says:

    New Labour was hardly authentic was it?!

    Apeing the Tories right up until the point the financial system the New Labour luvvies admired and lauded so much pulled the global economy down.

    In the 10 years between the 1997 election and the crash an authentic Labour would have been trashing day in day out the self evidently malign legacy of the previous Tory government, in the same way this coalition has done to Labour, even though given this government’s paltry achievements it’s galling to watch.

    It was always going to be difficult to turn the juggernaut around, and Ed to be fair has tried, in the face of some of the fiercest carping from some in his own camp.

    The results board is now filling up as we move towards the next General Election and on nearly every aspect of policy, the Tories have failed to meet any objectives. From borrowing to welfare reform to immigration to school standards to employment to (not least) the NHS this government is unavoidably badged as an unmitigated failure.

    The opportunity is there.

  3. Landless Peasant says:

    “Sound economic management, the currency of economic credibility, is not an alternative to advancing left wing values, improving working class conditions”

    It all depends if “Sound economic management” equates to continuing the demonization, harassment & persecution of the sick & unemployed claimants of State Benefits. Please tell me how grossly and illegally underpaid State Benefits, along with conditionality/Benefit Sanctions and the resulting proliferation of Foodbanks, improve working class conditions? Or how the dismantling of our Welfare State in general and the loss of many of our Services improves working class conditions? I am attracted to the Greens because they are more Socialist than Labour. I won’t vote for a Labour Party that supports Benefit Sanctions.

  4. Landless Peasant says:

    I won’t vote for a Labour Party that supports Benefit Sanctions….and further Austerity.

  5. Eric C says:

    The SNP are not more Left wing than Labour, they just make themselves out to be. Their trick is to talk up policies which have popular appeal in Scotland and are generally seen as “Left” such as the freeze on council tax and free prescriptions and make fine speeches on social justice while avoiding doing anything that might actually taste a bit like strong medicine to the average Scot. In fact their “Left wing” policies are the equivalent of “free beer on Thursday nights”, nobody is going to say no to that.

    If they really wanted more social services in line with the fabled Scandinavian model they wax lyrical over would be increasing taxes to pay for it. Of course they see that as electoral suicide and avoid like the plague.

    Labour should be exposing the SNP as the hypocrites they actually are. We in Scotland have allowed the SNP to convince Labour voters that they are the new left. I think it’s entirely possible that we can show the electorate that this is all smoke and mirrors.

  6. Tafia says:

    If they really wanted more social services in line with the fabled Scandinavian model they wax lyrical over >would be increasing taxes to pay for it. Of course they see that as electoral suicide and avoid like the plague.

    Errrm do you actually pay attention to what they say? They are very open and vocal about the fact they want tax-varying powers for precisely this and other reasons and which is the desire of the people of Scotland.

    And it has nothing to do with free beer on a Thursday night. It has to do with political skill. Any contentious policy that the SNP carry out in Holyrood or promote to the public at large is specifically designed in such a way that it appeals beyond the SNP – building bridges.

    Meanwhile, in the Labour Scotland leadership, Unite is now publicly backing the main rival to the Westminster-facing & Blairite stooge Murphy – saying that whatever happens he must not be allowed to be leader. Which basically puts Unite and Miliband head-to-head against each other.

    As Labour in Scotland continues to collapse and is rapidly approaching the level of support of the Tories.

  7. John Reid says:

    BenM had labour stood on the sort of manifesto ,you’d have like din 1997 we wouldn’t have own anyway
    Landless peasant ,you didn’t vote laur in 87 or 92 the pulbic rightly felt labour was a more far left party in 87′ than 83′ and Kinock our leader in 1992 fully backed the 83 manifesto, so saying you wouldn’t vote labour now, I doubt you’d ever vote labour, now even of Michael foot was alive and our leader,

  8. Landless Peasant says:

    @John Reid

    Michael Foot maybe, but if it were Tony Benn I would for sure, or Harold Wilson, or someone like Arthur Scargill or Ian Bone. Miliband is useless. He’s still peddling the Tory lie that Austerity is somehow unavoidable or is necessary, which insults our intelligence as most of us know it isn’t and the country is not skint.

  9. John Reid says:

    Landless peasant , Wilson won in 1974 with 11.4m votes in 64′ it was 12.2m, the tories had 13m votes n 1983′ and the 74 manifesto supported selling council homes, wilson campaigned on A EU referndum to stay in, on the understanding if we voted to stay in the EEC, the party must accept it, the 1959 manifesto, said sell of council homes, and in 1965 michael fot had the party whip withdrawn from him, for the last 4 years.

    Wilson said of Benn he i matures with age, everyone from Denis Healey to greald Kaufman said they’d have left labour had Benn won the deputy leadership,they wouldn’t have joined the SDP though, my parents voted foot, didn’t like Wilson, wouldn’t gave voted Benn
    Wilson begged Shirley Williams to stay in the party ,when she left in February 1981, 1 month before the SDP formed, Scargill he’s thE bloke who single handedly let that her beat him in the miners strike, and Kinnock didn’t want him in the party as far back as 1980

    Ian Bone is a joke toy town revolutionary, and his blog has associated itself with the SWP rape apologists,

    Good lick with your lot the greens should get 5% at the election.

  10. Tafia says:

    The SWP are no more or less ‘rape apologists’ than the Labour councillors in Rotherham, Rochdale and several other places for the last 20 years.

  11. Madasafish says:

    if Labour were more widely taken to be an authentic version of what we self-define as: the best vehicle for the advancement of left-wing values and working class interests

    After Emily Thornberry’s open contempt for “white van man”, it is clear Labour is the best vehicle for rich London based snobs who despise working people.. They clearly do not emphasise with those they claim to support so their motives must lie with money and power…

    This emphatically does not mean all Labour supporters despise working people.. but it is clear that a substantial numbers must do. After all, remember “bigot”..

  12. uglyfatbloke says:

    The gnats have been in government for 7 years…they’re hardly insurgents, but they do look like they will become the beneficiaries of our ridiculous anti-democratic electoral system.

Leave a Reply