Blairism Is No Solution To Labour’s Identity Crisis, by Richard Cotton

The “Blairites” are certainly right about Labour’s so-called 35 per cent strategy. How one envies the SNP for whom every Scottish voter is a target voter. Whatever happened to “One Nation Labour”?

They are also right to suggest that we should help people fulfil their aspirations; but their definition of aspiration is too narrowly focused.

It’s one thing to aspire to shop at John Lewis – I might aspire to shop at Fortnum and Mason – but what about those who aspire to make the shift from food banks to Lidl?

And what about those who may be well off themselves but who aspire to live in a more equal society?  Man cannot live by bread alone.

Labour was always a coalition of the liberal intelligentsia and organised labour but the deal was that the workers would support the liberals’ agenda in return for greater economic equality.

It’s a bargain that hasn’t been kept. Think of that wonderful film Pride about the Lesbian and Gay Miners’ Support Group in South Wales.

Since that time the LGBT community has won almost everything it set out to achieve and more. Who would have thought it possible that a Tory government would enact gay marriage?

Meanwhile, the mining communities in South Wales (and elsewhere) have been left to rot. The security of reasonably well-paid, albeit dangerous, jobs in mining have been replaced by zero-hours contracts on an inadequate minimum wage.  

All of this proves that greater equality in the social sphere does not lead to greater equality in the economic sphere.

Thatcherism was about policing the bedroom while allowing the market to rip in the economy.

Labour should be about the opposite – supporting individual rights through a socially liberal agenda while promoting economic equality through greater state intervention and regulation. 

But the “Blairites” are surely wrong to suggest that simply rehashing “Blairism” is the solution to our current problems.

It’s worth looking at the general election results in a bit more detail and comparing them with the last time Labour formed a government (under Tony Blair’s leadership), which was in 2005.

At that election Labour polled 9,552,436 votes, the SNP polled 412,267 and the Greens 257,758. In 2015, Labour polled 9,347,304, the SNP polled 1,454,436 and the Greens polled 1,157,613.

It is clear that Labour lost votes to parties perceived to be to the left of Labour (primarily the SNP and the Greens).

However, it is also obvious that Labour lost votes to Ukip as well. Plaid Cymru, also campaigning to the left of Labour, achieved its best ever general election result and Ukip were runners-up to Labour in a whole swathe of previously iron-clad Labour strongholds in the valleys.

What is less well known and gives the lie to the “Blairite” argument is that in England Labour polled more votes under Ed Miliband in 2015 than it did under Tony Blair in 2005 (8,087,684 compared with 8,065,213). 

That remarkably accurate exit poll showed that we increased our share of the vote among the middle class but lost heavily among working class voters.

It is surely a matter of concern to my party that 61 per cent of Ukip’s supporters are working class?

It is not immediately clear how a return to “Blairism”, presumably complete with foreign wars fought by expendable working class youths, will win back voters from the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party.

It is even less clear how a return to “Blairism”, with its love of globalisation, slavish adherence to the EU “project” and support for free movement of capital and labour can win back those who deserted Labour for Ukip.

The “Blairite” solution to “left behind” groups voting Ukip would appear to be to leave them there.

There are no easy answers and it is dishonest to suggest otherwise. Labour needs a clean break from the past and new faces at the top. Whoever they are they will need to appeal to the voters we have lost in such large numbers.

It is difficult to see how they can appeal to those voting for the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens at the same time as appealing to those who voted for Ukip.

But it is not impossible, because polling data suggest that these groups have a lot in common. For example, Ukip voters are overwhelmingly in favour of renationalising the railways and higher spending on the NHS.

There is a symbiotic relationship between the cultural anxieties of Ukip voters and the confident nationalism of those who voted Plaid Cymru and SNP – by the way, the clue is in the name: Scottish National Party.

The SNP taps into a sense of national pride, shared history, and community which too many on the left regard as “false consciousness”.

In a world which moves on at frightening speed, destroying communities in its wake and causing mass insecurity, people are looking for a sense of identity (did anyone notice the Liverpool fans’ banner just after the election? “We’re not English, we’re Scouse”, it said) and most of us have multiple identities.

Labour needs to understand this and connect with it.

Richard Cotton has been a Camden councillor since 2014, a Labour Party member since 1967, and an active trade unionist for almost as long. He worked for Camden Council in the 1970s and was political adviser to the leader of Brent  from 1987 to 2010. This article originally appeared here, and is reproduced at the author’s request.

Labour Should Embrace A More Sceptical Approach To The EU, by Richard Cotton

Labour has always been the driving force for constitutional reform and democratic advance, from Kier Hardie’s support of the suffragettes, to the Attlee Government’s abolition of plural voting with the removal of the property based business vote and university constituencies in 1948.

Prior to that, businessmen who were also graduates had as many as three votes.

In 1969 it was a Labour Government, which lowered the voting age from 21 to 18.

In 1975, it was a Labour Government that, in the teeth of strong Tory opposition, granted the British people the right to determine their future in or out of Europe with the first UK wide referendum on EEC membership.

It was, of course, a Tory Government which took Britain into the EEC without a referendum.

Since then there have been nine further national and regional referendums, eight on devolution issues, three in Wales, two in Scotland and one each in Northern Ireland, the North East and Greater London, together with the UK-wide referendum on the Alternative Vote (AV) in 2011.

In addition, under the Blair Government there were 37 local referendums on the constitutional arrangements for local government (elected mayors, etc).

Indeed, until now only twice has a Tory Government supported a referendum, once in 1973 on the constitution position of Northern Ireland, and the second time in 2011 on the Alternative Vote, but that was only conceded as part of the Coalition Agreement.

Historically, it was always Labour that championed the right of the British people to determine constitutional issues, just as it was Labour that was historically opposed to the EEC, which has now morphed into a neoliberal concept known as the EU.

It is difficult to understand why the party opposed the EEC on the grounds that it was a ‘capitalist club’ yet know embraces the EU, which really does enshrine neoliberalism into law: read the Single European Act.

The EU is now embarking on secret negotiations known as the Transanlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which will give all power to global corporations and destroy our cherished NHS.

The party says that the EU is not an issue that resonates on doorsteps, and that is true. But issues related to the EU often do.

For example the way in which house prices in central London have rocketed as a result of overseas buyers buying new homes and leaving them empty. Denmark negotiated an opt out on foreign ownership of homes as a result if which you have to be a Danish citizen in order to own property in Denmark.

People are also concerned about the free movement of capital and labour, not because they fear outsiders, but because they fear that free movement benefits the rich and powerful and not communities like the car workers in Hampshire whose jobs were outsourced to Turkey with the aid of an EU grant.

It is, to say the least ,odd that EU membership means that our immigration policy privileges ‘EU citizens’ over West Indians, Indians or New Zealanders. Yet it is often those who are Eurosceptic who are accused of being racist.

How can it be right that Scotland gets to vote on their constitutional relationship with the rest of the UK, yet the UK as whole is denied a referendum on our constitutional relationship with the EU? Before anyone says we had such a referendum in 1975, that was on the EEC not the EU.

Uncritical support of the EU has now become an article of faith for many Labour representatives and activists, but surely we should embrace a little more scepticism if we are to reflect public opinion?

And, at the very least, we should embrace an in/out referendum both to demonstrate our democratic credentials and to wrong foot the Tories who have set and arbitrary date for a referendum.

It’s good that Ed is promising a referendum in the event of any further transfer of power to the EU. But many remember that we were promised a referendum on the EU constitution, aka the Lisbon Treaty.

I fear that if we continue to be seen on the side of the undemocratic EU elite, then it won’t just be the Tories who lose support to UKIP.