This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/18/ed-miliband-government-election-labour

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Ed Miliband is thinking about government, not just the next election Ed Miliband is thinking about government, not just the next election
(5 months later)
The recent mini-revolt of Blairite grandees is about much more than the outcome of the next election. It's a rearguard to defend an entire way of doing politics – the New Labour project itself. The essentials of this approach prescribe narrow limits within which Labour must operate if it wants to govern: a fixed and unchangeable centre-ground that Labour must capture by veering right, respect for the prerogatives of the conservative power-elites, such as the City and the newspaper barons, a willingness to demonstrate strength by making an example of the weak and a rejection of wealth taxes, along with egalitarianism in general, as anti-aspirational.The recent mini-revolt of Blairite grandees is about much more than the outcome of the next election. It's a rearguard to defend an entire way of doing politics – the New Labour project itself. The essentials of this approach prescribe narrow limits within which Labour must operate if it wants to govern: a fixed and unchangeable centre-ground that Labour must capture by veering right, respect for the prerogatives of the conservative power-elites, such as the City and the newspaper barons, a willingness to demonstrate strength by making an example of the weak and a rejection of wealth taxes, along with egalitarianism in general, as anti-aspirational.
The reluctance with which these conclusions were drawn in the bitter isolation of the Thatcher years might be expected to occasion some relief at the prospect of change. In fact, it explains the doggedness with which they are still defended today. The New Labour model of politics may have been built with an enemy bayonet at their backs but, like Alec Guinness in Bridge on the River Kwai, the Blairites are not about to let anyone else blow it up. They have given too much of themselves to its construction to let that happen.The reluctance with which these conclusions were drawn in the bitter isolation of the Thatcher years might be expected to occasion some relief at the prospect of change. In fact, it explains the doggedness with which they are still defended today. The New Labour model of politics may have been built with an enemy bayonet at their backs but, like Alec Guinness in Bridge on the River Kwai, the Blairites are not about to let anyone else blow it up. They have given too much of themselves to its construction to let that happen.
For men and women of the left – often the far left – the road to New Labour was a decade-long ordeal of humiliation and self-abasement. They not only had to ditch the cherished hopes and beliefs of their youth, they also had to convince themselves and others that they meant it by turning yesterday's universal truths into objects of mockery. That was awful enough. For an upstart like Ed Miliband to come along now and imply that it might not have been entirely necessary is simply unbearable. No one wants to be told that their best years were devoted to a fool's errand.For men and women of the left – often the far left – the road to New Labour was a decade-long ordeal of humiliation and self-abasement. They not only had to ditch the cherished hopes and beliefs of their youth, they also had to convince themselves and others that they meant it by turning yesterday's universal truths into objects of mockery. That was awful enough. For an upstart like Ed Miliband to come along now and imply that it might not have been entirely necessary is simply unbearable. No one wants to be told that their best years were devoted to a fool's errand.
So the message of the grandees is that nothing has really changed; that political reality still dictates a binary choice between old and New Labour. By moving beyond the latter, Miliband has, they believe, retreated to the comfort zone of the former by turning Labour into a protest voice of the marginalised. Failure must surely follow. That, of course, is pure spin. Miliband certainly believes that the economic crisis gives him the opportunity to reopen debates about the distribution of wealth, the role of financial services, the limitations of markets and the responsibilities of business. But the modern egalitarian politics he is developing is designed to appeal explicitly to the "squeezed middle". One Nation Labour is hardly the slogan of a party pursuing a 35% core vote strategy.So the message of the grandees is that nothing has really changed; that political reality still dictates a binary choice between old and New Labour. By moving beyond the latter, Miliband has, they believe, retreated to the comfort zone of the former by turning Labour into a protest voice of the marginalised. Failure must surely follow. That, of course, is pure spin. Miliband certainly believes that the economic crisis gives him the opportunity to reopen debates about the distribution of wealth, the role of financial services, the limitations of markets and the responsibilities of business. But the modern egalitarian politics he is developing is designed to appeal explicitly to the "squeezed middle". One Nation Labour is hardly the slogan of a party pursuing a 35% core vote strategy.
Miliband does not assume a general shift to the left of the kind dismissed by Tony Blair last week. He just takes a nuanced view of public opinion that rejects the idea of an unchanging centre. There are clearly issues where significant change is now possible, as the debates on top pay and tax amply show. There are other policy areas, such as immigration, where Miliband has made a conscious effort to respond to a hardening of public concern. Even on issues where he is holding a defensive line against the government, he is making deliberate efforts to win the argument in middle Britain by emphasising the impact of welfare cuts on people in work, for example. He picks his fights selectively and sensibly.Miliband does not assume a general shift to the left of the kind dismissed by Tony Blair last week. He just takes a nuanced view of public opinion that rejects the idea of an unchanging centre. There are clearly issues where significant change is now possible, as the debates on top pay and tax amply show. There are other policy areas, such as immigration, where Miliband has made a conscious effort to respond to a hardening of public concern. Even on issues where he is holding a defensive line against the government, he is making deliberate efforts to win the argument in middle Britain by emphasising the impact of welfare cuts on people in work, for example. He picks his fights selectively and sensibly.
Miliband's positions on things like the deficit and public spending are not the result of ideological inertia, as his critics like to claim. They are calculated judgments designed to leave room for manoeuvre in government, like Margaret Thatcher's refusal to rule out VAT rises or pension cuts in 1979. For all the claims that he lacks ambition, Miliband is the one thinking about how to govern effectively while his critics talk exclusively about how to win the next election. As he has told friends, he is determined to avoid the twin perils of "no chance" and "no change". He understands perfectly well that a lack of credibility on the difficult issues would mean no chance (not for him the fantasy politics of "no cuts"). But he also looks at the fate of left parties elected to office elsewhere and is resolved to prevent the stagnation and disillusionment that comes with no change. To Miliband, these are two different varieties of failure and Labour must avoid both of them.Miliband's positions on things like the deficit and public spending are not the result of ideological inertia, as his critics like to claim. They are calculated judgments designed to leave room for manoeuvre in government, like Margaret Thatcher's refusal to rule out VAT rises or pension cuts in 1979. For all the claims that he lacks ambition, Miliband is the one thinking about how to govern effectively while his critics talk exclusively about how to win the next election. As he has told friends, he is determined to avoid the twin perils of "no chance" and "no change". He understands perfectly well that a lack of credibility on the difficult issues would mean no chance (not for him the fantasy politics of "no cuts"). But he also looks at the fate of left parties elected to office elsewhere and is resolved to prevent the stagnation and disillusionment that comes with no change. To Miliband, these are two different varieties of failure and Labour must avoid both of them.
The post-2008 world is one that yesterday's modernisers seem barely able to comprehend. Polls showing huge majorities in favour of higher wealth taxes must be wrong because, as we know, voters are aspirational and wealth taxes are not. The idea that a post-Thatcherite settlement is possible or that determined leadership can help to bring it about is dismissed out of hand. Blairites talk a lot about leadership and change without, it seems, really believing in either. Miliband feels differently and senses that the time is right for a historic shift. He might even succeed, assuming that he can persuade his party to ignore those calling for a return to New Labour's old minimalism.The post-2008 world is one that yesterday's modernisers seem barely able to comprehend. Polls showing huge majorities in favour of higher wealth taxes must be wrong because, as we know, voters are aspirational and wealth taxes are not. The idea that a post-Thatcherite settlement is possible or that determined leadership can help to bring it about is dismissed out of hand. Blairites talk a lot about leadership and change without, it seems, really believing in either. Miliband feels differently and senses that the time is right for a historic shift. He might even succeed, assuming that he can persuade his party to ignore those calling for a return to New Labour's old minimalism.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.