Sunday Review on Tuesday: The Purple Book

20/09/2011, 04:57:33 PM

by David Talbot

It is hard to recall now, but 2 May 1997 was a gorgeous spring morning. It felt as though it might have been 26 July 1945, the day that ushered in the first majority Labour government. The country seemed fresh again; there was a sense of something about to be born, a new world, a new start, a new Britain – a new Labour. Even the Conservatives, if you could find one, did not seem to resent the new era or begrudge this young, charismatic prime minister, who had led the Labour party out of 18 years exile to a stunning victory. It was, however, the beginning of his end. The triumphal procession of 1997 led to excited hopes that could never be fulfilled. It was, as George Dangerfield said of the Liberals in 1906, a victory from which Labour never recovered.

But we bought it, all thirteen and a half million of us. Those were the heady days of the new deal, taxes on the profits of privatised utilities, the minimum wage, sure start and five millennium villages (no, me neither). With British troops in Kosovo, even the wars were better.

Now, of course, it is different. The narrative of disillusionment and betrayal is almost beyond challenging. To speak well of him, these days, is to invite scorn, ridicule and worse among Britain’s self-appointed liberal intelligentsia. It is difficult to recall a former prime minister that was last faced with such rancour – much of it, it should be said, coming from his own side. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Postmodernism is dead. But Nick Clegg isn’t quite

19/09/2011, 09:13:29 AM

by Jonathan Todd

Edward Docx declared postmodernism dead in Prospect during the summer. Many hierarchies were shattered by postmodernism’s insistence that no perspective is more legitimate than another. This revolutionary insight has wrought all kinds of change over the past 40 years or so, but also contains the seeds of its own exhaustion. If all perspectives are valid, do any of them mean anything?

Our contemporary longing for authenticity suggests that postmodernism has left us with a deficit of meaning that we are seeking to fill. Docx sees this all around us.

“We can see it in the specificity of the local food movement or the repeated use of the word “proper” on gastropub menus … We can recognise it in advertising campaigns such as for Jack Daniel’s, which ache to portray not rebellion but authenticity. We can identify it in the way brands are trying to hold on to, or take up, an interest in ethics, or in a particular ethos”.

There is more politics in this observation than there might seem. And the political insight has much commonality with that contained in this tweet from Chris Dillow: “Politicians obsess about public opinion and are despised. Steve Jobs doesn’t do market research and is admired. There’s a lesson here.”

Jobs is thought authentic and politicians are not. He seems propelled by mission and genius, while politicians appear calculating and superficial. As postmodernism has encouraged the decline of deference, the political class has been lampooned. Politicians seek redemption by desperately scrutinising opinion polls. But they are looking in the wrong direction.

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

The seven-year itch: a cautionary tale of tax, cuts and debt

18/09/2011, 12:00:14 PM

by Rob Marchant

There was this bloke. And there was this girl. They met, fell in love, got married, usual story. It was a big, special wedding, everybody went. A match made in heaven, everyone said. People came out of their houses to wave as they went to the church. The kind of wedding that fills everyone with hope for the future.

She was popular, always a lot of boys round her. But she was smart, knew what she wanted. Sometimes it looked like she wasn’t paying much attention, but she did when it counted. Didn’t stand for any nonsense. He, on the other hand, was a bit of a tearaway. Heart in the right place, but not very together a lot of the time. And a drinker. A long history, in fact. Lots of girlfriends, but in the end, they all went, because of the drink. But not this one: this time it’d be different.

So, on the day they married, he promised to her that that was it with the drinking. And it was true. Never touched a drop. Day in, day out, he would walk home past the pub, think how lucky he was to have found her, and kept straight on walking. Life seemed charmed. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Sunday Review on Friday: What next for Labour?

16/09/2011, 02:24:47 PM

by Peter Watt

I have my copy of The Purple Book and I am loving it. It is great to have a coherent and well thought out vision for the next phase of Labour’s development. I agree with what Anthony Painter said on this site on Thursday:

“The Purple Book, published today, after months of political hysteria, is actually a largely constructive and imaginative collection. It is far from being “lazy” and “idiotic” as its detractors claim. This is the progressive Labour – out of political favour for almost half a decade – response to blue Labour. It is much more than that too. And it manages, fairly convincingly, to move on from its New Labour past”.

I strongly recommend that people buy and read it. But there is a downside to The Purple Book: that it will, inevitably, be seen as being partisan. Because of course it is. Speaking as a fully signed up member of progress, I am completely comfortable with the direction of its partisanship. But the Labour party is a coalition (I know that this is a bit of a dirty word, but I think we may well have to get used to it) and there will be many therefore who dismiss The Purple Book simply because it is from the progress stable. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Revealed: Government slashes welfare to work schemes by more than a third despite soaring unemployment

16/09/2011, 08:54:18 AM

by Atul Hatwal

New figures released this week reveal massive cuts in the levels of specialist support for the unemployed. The government has slashed the numbers of people taking part in welfare to work schemes by 34% over the past year, from 137,000 to 90,000.

The drop in government backed training and employment support is the largest since records began in 1992, with the number now taking part in these programmes at its lowest ever level.

The withdrawal of support for the unemployed comes at a time of sharply rising unemployment. It rocketed by 80,000 in the last quarter alone to cross the 2.5m threshold.

The figures were buried in a barrage of thousands of new labour force survey statistics released by the government on Wednesday.

Typically, the participants in welfare to work schemes are those most at risk of becoming long term unemployed (out of work for 12 months or more). As unemployment rises, the numbers in these types of schemes would be expected to go up, to prevent people losing touch with the job market.

In the early 1990s, even John Major’s Tory government used these programmes as a key tool to tackle unemployment. In the comparable quarter in 1992, there were 365,000 people participating in welfare to work schemes.

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Show voters you care: talk about their jobs, not yours

15/09/2011, 01:00:32 PM

by Peter Watt

I have developed an annoying habit. You know the way that ex-smokers are annoying, always pontificating in a superior way about the dangers of smoking, the nasty smell and the cost? Well I am kind of like that about politics. I used to “do politics” full time. I was a real insider and all that. And then I gave it up, and now I love to tell those still addicted the dangers of the habit, the nasty smell and of course the cost.

Well this week, let me tell you, I have felt a pretty smug ex-politico and to be honest I think that I am justified, even if I am annoying.

The real anger at Westminster this week has been reserved for, wait for it, the outcomes of the boundary commission. Not the weak state of the domestic, European or even world economy. Not the worryingly high level of inflation and the real pain being felt by families struggling to make ends meet. Not the implications of the welfare reform bill for people with disabilities or the health and social care bill. No, not even the hacking of phones could come close to the levels of Westminster angst that the threat to a handful of MPs’ jobs could raise.

MPs and political parties have been getting agitated about whether MP A or MP B might or might not have a seat after the election. At the same time, mere mortals are working hard just to pay their electricity, gas and food bills. Whatever the rights or wrongs of the policy to reduce the number of Westminster seats, I am not sure that much of the public will share the dismay of many at Westminster. Well, except the dismay that the numbers are not being reduced further. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Sunday Review on Thursday: The Purple Book

15/09/2011, 07:00:29 AM

by Anthony Painter

Breathe in. Hold. And relax.

The Purple Book, published today, after months of political hysteria, is actually a largely constructive and imaginative collection. It is far from being “lazy” and “idiotic” as its detractors claim. This is the progressive Labour – out of political favour for almost half a decade – response to blue Labour. It is much more than that too. And it manages, fairly convincingly, to move on from its New Labour past.

The frame for the collection comes from David Marquand’s Britain since 1918 where he discusses four British democracies. Tory nationalism and Whig imperialism speak for themselves. The other two are the major fault-lines that exist with the modern labour movement: democratic collectivist and democratic republicanism. The former finds expression in the old-style socialism of much of the trade union movement and in traditional (and caricatured) Fabianism.

Democratic republicanism – the belief in individual empowerment, relationships and localism – has rarely dominated. This collection is within that tradition, though it is by no means an exclusively “progressive” way of thinking.

This is a substantive undertaking. The ethos is that of John Milton, Alexis de Tocqueville, JS Mill, GDH Cole, RH Tawney and Amartya Sen amongst others. The qualifying criteria for a chapter in the book seems to be quoting or referencing Tawney. In fact, he could be the book’s co-editor, along with Robert Philpot with Sen occasionally popping into the room to sprinkle in thoughts on “capabilities” and “substantive freedom”.

This is both an internal and eternal feud. It’s easy to argue that the focus should be exclusively on the enemy, the Tories. But this misses the point. Effective armies don’t just strike; they prepare. And this internal battle that Labour is having is part of the preparation. After a while it could become destructive, but for now it’s healthy. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

We must ensure that fewer MPs means more democracy

14/09/2011, 01:00:13 PM

by Andy Howell

Much of practical politics is about dealing with paradox and balance. At one end of the political continuum we have creativity (risky) and at the other caution (inaction). Those at the creative end of the spectrum have to be brave enough to cope with the Daily Mail, the Express and, of course, Murdoch. Those who stay cautious may feel safe, but inaction and indecisiveness tends to see events pop up and bite them on the bum.

There is a great deal of indignation among Labour’s ruling elites about the Tory-Lib Dem government’s plans for boundary reform. They argue that this is all a fix to bash Labour; and in many senses they are right. But it is worth reflecting on lost opportunities as well as considering how we deal with the review and subsequently position ourselves on constitutional reform.

There has long been a widespread view, for which I have some sympathy, that we have too many MPs. The Lib Dems, in particular, have been vocal in pointing out that Labour did very little in power to think about representation and constituencies; our electoral law and practice is based on registered voters and not on population. Labour — they say — was simply too comfortable with falling turnout and poor voter registration. There may be some truth in this, but Labour’s real failure was in not reforming Parliament.

Quite simply, the job of a backbench MP does not look that great when viewed from outside. Why do we need so many MPs simply to act as voting fodder for the executive? Labour missed a massive opportunity to act imaginatively and decisively in renewing our system of governance. Select committees should have been given more power, more independence and — critically —more resources with which to carry out their work. Our leadership should have been more comfortable with the relaxation, or reinvention, of the traditional “whip” system.

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Why our politicians’ cracks need careful probing

14/09/2011, 09:19:54 AM

by Kevin Meagher

THERE is no roadmap. No right and wrong about how “down with the kids” our politicians are allowed to be. No clear indications about where the “line” is that they should not cross when it comes to humour.

Wit is allowed, that much is clear. Disraeli, Churchill, even Wilson were exponents. Sarcasm too; but after that it go all blurry.

Last week both the prime minister and chancellor found themselves in trouble after foraying across these invisible demarcations with faltering attempts at mirth. David Cameron’s description of Nadine Dorries as “frustrated” during a reply to her at prime minister’s questions drew hearty guffaws at her expense. “Frustrated. Ha! He means she hates the coalition – but he also means she isn’t getting any! Hilarious”.

His pregnant pause gave lie to his subsequent protestations that it was merely a slip of the tongue, so to speak. It seemed deliberate. All he had to do was tee-up the gag and let the dirty minds of our Parliamentarians finish it off. They ignobly obliged.

He is said to have form. Cameron has what earlier generations would have called a “blue” sense of humour. Not a denotation of political allegiance on this occasion, but a predilection for making nob and fart gags.

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Three little words: why Tom Harris is serious about being first minister

13/09/2011, 01:00:18 PM

by Tom Harris

Ah, the working class disease!

A couple of weeks ago a radio interviewer asked me if I was serious about being a candidate to succeed Iain Gray as leader of the Scottish Labour party. Ever mindful of the tendency of Scots to mutter, “I kent his faither” – in other words, “Who does he think he is?” – I mumbled something about only wishing to smoke out Westminster’s “big beasts”, Jim Murphy and Douglas Alexander.

Understandably, the SNP issued a gleeful press release stating that I was my own third choice for leader. Only ten minutes into my campaign and I had already made a rookie mistake. You have to want the position you’re going for. You have to want it bad.

And I do.

When, in 2007, Labour lost power at Holyrood by the slimmest of electoral margins possible, I realised that Labour’s position as the traditional repository of working class votes was going the same way as our briefly-held reputation as a safe haven for middle class voters – down the tubes. I felt strongly then that I could do more good for my country/countries and my party by relocating from Westminster to Holyrood at the first available opportunity. I talked it over with some journalist friends, all of whom were entirely encouraging. I also talked it over with my closest political confidante at the time, David Cairns. He was less encouraging. I’ll leave further details of our many conversations at that for the time being.

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon