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.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/25/labour-and-the-legacy-of-blair-and-brown
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Labour and the legacy of Blair and Brown | Labour and the legacy of Blair and Brown |
| (34 minutes later) | |
| Jonathan Freedland is wrong to say “Labour has to get over its Tony Blair problem” (Opinion, 23 May), since evidence from elsewhere in your paper indicates clearly that it was not the failure to be sufficiently New Labour that led to defeat at the election (Election 2015: who really voted for whom?, 23 May). Labour lost because it failed to bring out the under-40s and those living in social housing in sufficient numbers. In most social groups under 65, there was no dramatic swing to the Tories in the recent election. | Jonathan Freedland is wrong to say “Labour has to get over its Tony Blair problem” (Opinion, 23 May), since evidence from elsewhere in your paper indicates clearly that it was not the failure to be sufficiently New Labour that led to defeat at the election (Election 2015: who really voted for whom?, 23 May). Labour lost because it failed to bring out the under-40s and those living in social housing in sufficient numbers. In most social groups under 65, there was no dramatic swing to the Tories in the recent election. |
| Freedland urges us to consider the successful policies of the Blairites, including “the minimum wage, the pensioners lifted out of poverty, the civil partnerships, the Sure Start centres, devolution, the windfall tax, the rebuilding of broken schools and rundown hospitals”. However, these policies were and are neither particularly radical, nor are they the prerogative of Blairites. Some were part of the grain of history and enacted elsewhere without New Labour administrations – notably Scotland and our partners in Europe; while others, including investment in schools and hospitals, were paid for through the private finance initiative, to the everlasting debt of the British taxpayer and generations to come. | Freedland urges us to consider the successful policies of the Blairites, including “the minimum wage, the pensioners lifted out of poverty, the civil partnerships, the Sure Start centres, devolution, the windfall tax, the rebuilding of broken schools and rundown hospitals”. However, these policies were and are neither particularly radical, nor are they the prerogative of Blairites. Some were part of the grain of history and enacted elsewhere without New Labour administrations – notably Scotland and our partners in Europe; while others, including investment in schools and hospitals, were paid for through the private finance initiative, to the everlasting debt of the British taxpayer and generations to come. |
| We do not need to disinter Tony Blair to win, we simply need radical and green policies that bring Labour supporters to the voting booth and stop defections to other parties (including the SNP, Green and Ukip).Michael RedcliftEmeritus professor of international environmental policy, King’s College London | |
| • I’d suggest the task of getting over the Gordon Brown problem is much more pressing. This was a man who came to power with income tax at 23p, which almost no one thought was too high. Yet, for the sake of a couple of dispatch-box flourishes, Brown reduced it to 20p, leaving revenue spending underfunded and capital spending dependent on expensive PFI schemes which will contribute to the budget deficit for years to come. Underpinning all this was an economy heavily reliant on financial services and a debt-fuelled consumer boom. | • I’d suggest the task of getting over the Gordon Brown problem is much more pressing. This was a man who came to power with income tax at 23p, which almost no one thought was too high. Yet, for the sake of a couple of dispatch-box flourishes, Brown reduced it to 20p, leaving revenue spending underfunded and capital spending dependent on expensive PFI schemes which will contribute to the budget deficit for years to come. Underpinning all this was an economy heavily reliant on financial services and a debt-fuelled consumer boom. |
| This did precisely nothing for core Labour voters in towns across Britain which once had economic hearts, but which now are characterised by decay and the onward march of Ukip. After 2010 the Brown government decamped to the opposition benches, its thinking and personnel largely unchanged, with a result that was entirely predictable. And now the Labour party looks likely to move forward by choosing between two more members of this discredited clique, Burnham and Cooper. Michael WoodgateBristol | This did precisely nothing for core Labour voters in towns across Britain which once had economic hearts, but which now are characterised by decay and the onward march of Ukip. After 2010 the Brown government decamped to the opposition benches, its thinking and personnel largely unchanged, with a result that was entirely predictable. And now the Labour party looks likely to move forward by choosing between two more members of this discredited clique, Burnham and Cooper. Michael WoodgateBristol |
| • The high point for many of the recent general election campaign was the BBC Question Time event from Leeds during which a cross-section of voters confronted David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg. I suggest it might help the Labour party in its current travails if it could arrange a similar event for those leadership candidates vying to succeed Mr Miliband. How better to gauge which, if any, of them is able to engage with voters and craft a new, more attractive political message?Robin LustigLondon | • The high point for many of the recent general election campaign was the BBC Question Time event from Leeds during which a cross-section of voters confronted David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg. I suggest it might help the Labour party in its current travails if it could arrange a similar event for those leadership candidates vying to succeed Mr Miliband. How better to gauge which, if any, of them is able to engage with voters and craft a new, more attractive political message?Robin LustigLondon |
| • Your editorial (The party has got its leadership election process back to front, 21 May) hits the nail on the head. The system Labour has for choosing its leader is contemptuous of its membership. The lessons to be drawn from the general election must be confronted, however painful. In particular, those defending Ed Miliband’s leadership (Letters, 18 May) need to get a grip on reality. | • Your editorial (The party has got its leadership election process back to front, 21 May) hits the nail on the head. The system Labour has for choosing its leader is contemptuous of its membership. The lessons to be drawn from the general election must be confronted, however painful. In particular, those defending Ed Miliband’s leadership (Letters, 18 May) need to get a grip on reality. |
| There was no way the public would elect him as prime minister. He was not up to the job and most people knew this. A man so ruthless as to stand against his gifted elder brother, David, in the leadership contest was not to be trusted. The membership voted for David, but Ed won on a leftwing ticket because of the union block vote. The election strategy did not show the electorate that Labour favoured the growth of a strong economy. Debt and more debt seemed to be the message, as populist bits of policy were drip-fed to the public. One could not imagine this man performing on a world stage – not that foreign policy was given serious consideration. A trusted interim leader, as you suggest, could help to sort out the mess, including the big question of why a party that claims to be concerned with equality has not yet elected a woman leader.June PurvisPortsmouth | There was no way the public would elect him as prime minister. He was not up to the job and most people knew this. A man so ruthless as to stand against his gifted elder brother, David, in the leadership contest was not to be trusted. The membership voted for David, but Ed won on a leftwing ticket because of the union block vote. The election strategy did not show the electorate that Labour favoured the growth of a strong economy. Debt and more debt seemed to be the message, as populist bits of policy were drip-fed to the public. One could not imagine this man performing on a world stage – not that foreign policy was given serious consideration. A trusted interim leader, as you suggest, could help to sort out the mess, including the big question of why a party that claims to be concerned with equality has not yet elected a woman leader.June PurvisPortsmouth |
| • Many Labour members would agree that the leadership race is being rushed. The five-year parliament gives the Labour party the space to elect an interim leader. This would have been inconceivable previously, when a prime minister could call an election almost at will. An interim leader can drive an effective opposition in parliament. They can draw together the strands of thought needed for assessing why the Labour loss was so great and where the party should go next. Such a leader can also encourage the rebuilding of the party grass roots and its damaged local government base.An interim leader has the luxury not to play the Westminster game. They can ignore PMQs, derided by most Britons outside the political bubble, and allow backbench talent to flower. It is not too late for one or more such candidates to announce themselves, committing themselves to resign in 2017, and for the existing candidates to withdraw from the present race. Andy JordanWirksworth, Derbyshire | • Many Labour members would agree that the leadership race is being rushed. The five-year parliament gives the Labour party the space to elect an interim leader. This would have been inconceivable previously, when a prime minister could call an election almost at will. An interim leader can drive an effective opposition in parliament. They can draw together the strands of thought needed for assessing why the Labour loss was so great and where the party should go next. Such a leader can also encourage the rebuilding of the party grass roots and its damaged local government base.An interim leader has the luxury not to play the Westminster game. They can ignore PMQs, derided by most Britons outside the political bubble, and allow backbench talent to flower. It is not too late for one or more such candidates to announce themselves, committing themselves to resign in 2017, and for the existing candidates to withdraw from the present race. Andy JordanWirksworth, Derbyshire |
| • Jonathan Freedland’s interesting analysis of the “haunting” of Labour by its erstwhile “three-time election winner” omits a critically important ingredient in Blair’s electoral success. From the outset, Blair set out to cultivate the Tory press: Lord Rothermere, Conrad Black (whom he knew through the Bilderberg Conferences that he flatly denied attending) and particularly Rupert Murdoch. He was greatly assisted by the fact that the then prime minister, John Major, kept distant from the press and was much more ideologically committed to the EU than Blair affected to be, a red-line issue for Murdoch. | • Jonathan Freedland’s interesting analysis of the “haunting” of Labour by its erstwhile “three-time election winner” omits a critically important ingredient in Blair’s electoral success. From the outset, Blair set out to cultivate the Tory press: Lord Rothermere, Conrad Black (whom he knew through the Bilderberg Conferences that he flatly denied attending) and particularly Rupert Murdoch. He was greatly assisted by the fact that the then prime minister, John Major, kept distant from the press and was much more ideologically committed to the EU than Blair affected to be, a red-line issue for Murdoch. |
| Having persuaded Murdoch that his version of Labour, which ditched the term socialist in favour of New, along with clause IV, was no threat to Murdoch’s global ambitions, Blair secured the tacit and even overt support of the Tory press. In any case, the Tories were exhausted, corrupt and riven with dissent, just as in 1964. Major’s three successors as Tory leader were equally diffident about appealing to Murdoch et al. Blair was succeeded by Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, who were respectively indifferent to and hostile to the Tory press barons. David Cameron has been lavish in his attentions to editors and proprietors, taking his cue from Blair and Margaret Thatcher. Miliband’s direct threat to the tax arrangements of Rothermere and the Barclay brothers guaranteed brutal treatment in return. | Having persuaded Murdoch that his version of Labour, which ditched the term socialist in favour of New, along with clause IV, was no threat to Murdoch’s global ambitions, Blair secured the tacit and even overt support of the Tory press. In any case, the Tories were exhausted, corrupt and riven with dissent, just as in 1964. Major’s three successors as Tory leader were equally diffident about appealing to Murdoch et al. Blair was succeeded by Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, who were respectively indifferent to and hostile to the Tory press barons. David Cameron has been lavish in his attentions to editors and proprietors, taking his cue from Blair and Margaret Thatcher. Miliband’s direct threat to the tax arrangements of Rothermere and the Barclay brothers guaranteed brutal treatment in return. |
| In my view, the next Labour leader needs to combat rather than cultivate the Tory press. A ruthless rapid-rebuttal unit should counter every example of black propaganda immediately and repeatedly. The internet is ideal for this, so much more effective than belatedly securing an insincere retraction at the bottom of page 16. A crack team of old-school yellow journalists should be deployed to dig up everything knowable about the owners, editors and political correspondents of the newspapers, along with the Tory frontbench, to be kept for retaliation and/or pre-emption. Labour needs to fight back and fight back dirty, and it should be perfectly open about its intention to do so. W Stephen GilbertCorsham, Wiltshire | In my view, the next Labour leader needs to combat rather than cultivate the Tory press. A ruthless rapid-rebuttal unit should counter every example of black propaganda immediately and repeatedly. The internet is ideal for this, so much more effective than belatedly securing an insincere retraction at the bottom of page 16. A crack team of old-school yellow journalists should be deployed to dig up everything knowable about the owners, editors and political correspondents of the newspapers, along with the Tory frontbench, to be kept for retaliation and/or pre-emption. Labour needs to fight back and fight back dirty, and it should be perfectly open about its intention to do so. W Stephen GilbertCorsham, Wiltshire |
| • Jonathan Freedland wants us to think about how Blair won three elections. Well, as I remember it, he put all the emphasis on himself as leader, rather than the party – like Ed Miliband. He went scurrying to secure the support of Rupert Murdoch – like David Cameron. And he focused on securing the support of floating voters in key marginals – like Lynton Crosby. Yippee. I can hardly wait to sign up. Paul FrancisMuch Wenlock, Shropshire | • Jonathan Freedland wants us to think about how Blair won three elections. Well, as I remember it, he put all the emphasis on himself as leader, rather than the party – like Ed Miliband. He went scurrying to secure the support of Rupert Murdoch – like David Cameron. And he focused on securing the support of floating voters in key marginals – like Lynton Crosby. Yippee. I can hardly wait to sign up. Paul FrancisMuch Wenlock, Shropshire |
| • Jonathan Freedland’s call for Labour to make peace with Blair is misguided. The reason why Blair won three elections on the trot and why the Tories have won a second term comes down to one thing: the economy, stupid. And as soon as this goes into recession again, which it is bound to do, there will be a change of government. | • Jonathan Freedland’s call for Labour to make peace with Blair is misguided. The reason why Blair won three elections on the trot and why the Tories have won a second term comes down to one thing: the economy, stupid. And as soon as this goes into recession again, which it is bound to do, there will be a change of government. |
| The reason why Labour needs to cut all links with Blair is because three election wins turned him into something of a megalomaniac, with a sprinkling of the religious zealot thrown in for good measure. To invite Blair back into the Labour fold would be utterly misguided and counterproductive. Yes, Labour needs to make its policies more relevant, convincing and financially attractive, but it certainly does not need to go back to a very controversial past. Blair is history; let’s keep him that way.Jonathan CockburnLydney, Gloucestershire | The reason why Labour needs to cut all links with Blair is because three election wins turned him into something of a megalomaniac, with a sprinkling of the religious zealot thrown in for good measure. To invite Blair back into the Labour fold would be utterly misguided and counterproductive. Yes, Labour needs to make its policies more relevant, convincing and financially attractive, but it certainly does not need to go back to a very controversial past. Blair is history; let’s keep him that way.Jonathan CockburnLydney, Gloucestershire |
Previous version
1
Next version