The Labour Party’s desperate situation can still be rescued says “Arkwright”, a senior government insider
“Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though humanity stood up and beat the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again.”
– Bertolt Brecht, The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui (1941)
When Brecht wrote those lines, he was referring to the dangers inherent in the re-emergence of the economic and social conditions that permitted the rise of Adolf Hitler. While the title of his play suggests that fascism is far from inevitable, his words bear a stark warning for British politics today.
The situation is undeniably bleak. We are in the midst of an economic crisis, hardworking people are feeling insecure for themselves and their families, unemployment is at an unacceptable level, we all seem in the grip of anonymous global forces and now there are widespread doubts about the very politicians who run the country.
The question we must ask is: does Brecht’s warning apply to us now? In the never-ending contest between progress and reaction, the conditions certainly seem to be present for a decisive shift to the right. Are we almost bound to witness a reactionary moment leading to the takeover of the country by the right?
The situation is certainly difficult, but it is too soon to say that the forces for progress have been decisively beaten.
The European election certainly favoured the three parties of the right: the Tories, the UK Independence Party and the British National Party. Nonetheless, if we listen carefully to voices in the country, it is not yet clear that this signals a clear shift to individualism and market-driven solutions in our political culture. There is a disjunction between the value systems of the parties which were elected and the core beliefs of the mass of the British people. Let’s begin our reflections on the European elections by accepting that Labour returned a disastrous result, but there are a number of points that need to be considered before we can begin to interpret this.
It hardly helped the party that Hazel Blears decided to resign the day before the election and that other “comrades” decided to vent similar thoughts in public, too. But these elections were, without a doubt, the “expenses” elections. They were simply not decided on the key political, economic and social issues of the day.
There is no excuse for the flagrant abuse of expenses by many Labour MPs. But the run up to polling day was over-shadowed by an asymmetric attack by the Conservative-supporting Daily Telegraph. They sought to damage the ruling Labour Party and airbrush the Tory abuse. There was no mistaking the timing. Let’s not forget that the initial Telegraph story attempted to immobilise the Prime Minister with what turned out to be false allegations of impropriety. Simultaneously, the newspaper sought to say that David Cameron and George Osborne were “clean” – which we now know was untrue.
We now also know that the people who sold the stolen files were confirmed associates of the upper echelons of the Tory Party; one is rumoured to be a member of the Carlton Club Political Committee, a secretive organisation, open only to Tories, said to raise £1 million a year for the party. The lop-sided and political nature of the expenses stories, together with the fact Labour is the incumbent in office, inevitably had a greater electoral impact on Gordon Brown’s party.
If we look at the detail of the European elections, beneath the fact that the Tories made significant gains, we can see another truth. Under Cameron, the Conservatives actually polled 4 per cent less well than they did in 1999 under William Hague – a man whose tenure in leadership was generally considered a failure.
Clearly, there was an electoral drift to the parties of the right, with UKIP and the BNP grasping a much larger share of the vote, but the Greens also made significant gains, coming third place in a number of key areas.
But most voters stayed away from the polls. In truth, a staggering 56 per cent of those who bothered to turn out voted for parties not currently represented in the House of Commons. This was not a vote in favour of Cameron and against Brown. It was a howl of protest against the whole Westminster political elite.
As bad as things appear to be to Guardian columnists, there are elements in this crisis which continue to favour the progressive left. We need to identify these and build on them. There has not been a genuine shift in the political weather as in 1945, with the return of soldiers from war looking for collectivist solutions and the subsequent election of Clement Atlee. In 1979, we saw a similar shift in the opposite direction; people were looking for more individualistic, free-market solutions and Margaret Thatcher was ideally positioned to capture that spirit.
But 2009 is no 1945; nor is it a 1979. So what gives grounds for optimism and what should cause us concern? If we start with the negatives, there are some issues which absolutely need to be addressed.
It is obvious, first, that Labour must put a distance between the party and the expenses claims of some of its MPs. This will mean that the National Executive Committee must be tough – and be seen to be tough – with those who have done wrong. We need to ensure that, in future, Labour candidates and MPs are exemplars of financial probity.
Second, there is widespread dismay with and alienation from the political elite and the parliamentary processes – for which we as the governing party are held to be responsible. Parliament and the party system need to be reformed. Labour ought to be the change-maker on this issue of democratic renewal.
Third, whenever there is economic turbulence and rapid social change, where communities are disrupted and individual lives dislocated, there is a natural instinct for people to look for security.
We feel threatened by the forces which are bringing about change. And so we must acknowledge that the waves of migration across Europe and also within the United Kingdom are leading to difficult sentiments. It’s clear that the left in Britain and throughout Europe has paid insufficient attention to the rising levels of anxiety and the corollary is xenophobic and racist impulses.
Nonetheless, having acknowledged that the left has been wrong-footed on these and other issues, on the key dichotomy of collectivist rather than individualist responses to the economic crisis, the values of the British people remain firmly rooted in progressive solutions. In the midst of an economic crisis, people are not calling for unfettered markets.
The British are for fairness and equity. They reject the values of greed among the elite, whether MPs or bankers. They didn’t agree with Thatcher when she said there was no such thing as society. Gordon Brown captured something essential about the British when he said that we don’t walk by on the other side of the road if someone is suffering. None of us want to live in a community that sees people socially excluded, whether this in the form of unemployment, losing a family home because the wage-earner can’t afford their mortgage, or businesses suffering at the hands of the banks.
In a time of recession, these values should lead the British to the conclusion that our response should be progressive rather than reactionary.
The key dividing line between Labour and the Tories has become crystal clear in the current economic climate: to invest or to cut our way out of recession; to help the most vulnerable in their hour of need or to tell them to get on a bike and seek jobs elsewhere.
On four key issues, the Tories are wholly out of touch with the values of the country they seek to govern. They are seen as being for the few, not the many. They would do nothing in response to the recession. They are seen as favouring public service cuts. Finally, they are not regarded as supportive of the National Health Service.
Their attitude to the spending cuts, the NHS and inheritance tax exemplifies all that is wrong about the Tories and promises that the fight for a fourth term Labour government is far from over.
In the midst of an economic crisis, the Conservatives would do nothing. At a time of rising unemployment, they would cut public services by 10 per cent. Their health spokesperson has called for the unit costs of the NHS to be reduced. The savings they would make would be spent in a £2 billion tax give away to the super rich.
It would be spending cuts for the middle- and lower-income many, with tax cuts for the wealthy few. The Tory view is of a government where you are left on your own, rather than one which is on your side.
The truth about Cameron is contained in his notorious Glasgow by-election speech. He asked why NHS expenditure should be prioritised in areas where, for example, people are fat or poor. After all, he continued, poverty and obesity are the products of individual personal choice.
The right is not in tune with our nation’s values. So the key question now is whether Labour can find a language which expresses these sentiments and whether our voice can be heard in the din surrounding expenses, the self-inflicted wounds caused by Cabinet resignations and derisory talk about the political class in the right-wing media and – sadly – the BBC.
All these factors combine to create a kind of fog through which the electorate cannot quite make out our what we stand for. The progressive left needs to clarify its message, come to terms with its mistakes, mindful of Brecht’s warning, and then move on.
We should have the self-confidence to articulate the common sense views of the British who want the elite to be brought to account, a government which is on their side, fairness in public life, as well as cohesive and secure communities.
There is a Labour response to the current economic and political crisis. We can still offer a way forward, although time is alarmingly short. It will not be enough to stand on an anti-Tory manifesto, however, nor to rest on our achievements.
The shape of our “future offer” to the electorate ought to be clear, based on an end to elite greed and closed processes of governance in both the private and public sectors.
Our candidates should be free of expenses sleaze. There should be a total break with the gentlemen’s club in the House of Commons. We should advance a reformed and elected upper chamber, political and civic renewal, a tax and welfare system which creates an equitable society and a social Europe that offers security.
We must also set local councils free, continue to finance and reform core public services, promote new rights for individuals and communities in the face of both the state but equally private corporation. There must be a an end to corporate greed
We need a massive building programme for a new generation of social housing, a job creation programme and an educational system to tackle unemployment growth. We require sustainable jobs to address the threat to the planet posed by global warming.
The country is ready for real change and it’s time that our leaders recalled the following words: “Some may feel that complacency has crept in, momentum has been lost or the vision dimmed. Then take inspiration from the unyielding determination of our pioneers: tough times did not diminish their idealism, but made them even more determined that to transform lives you have to transform society. This Labour Party – best when we are boldest, best when we are united, best when we are Labour.”
They are after all, the words of our current Prime Minister.
“Arkwright” is a pseudonym for a highly-placed member of the Government who wishes to share an insider’s knowledge in a wider debate about the future of Labour. The author will be appearing on an occasional basis.
