The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

As the crisis continues, Labour just looks tired

If it's safety first and safety last, then the party is doomed to disappoint.

Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman with leader Ed Miliband.
Labour's annual conference opens in Manchester this Sunday. Photograph: Getty Images.

Shhhhhhhh. Quiet!! Labour is sleepwalking to the next election. Don’t wake it up. It might die of fright. Whisper. Don’t rock the boat. It's one more heave but without any heave. If it doesn’t move or make sound – then it might cross the finishing line of the election first without anyone noticing.

Next week, Labour is having its annual conference.  An event where nothing will happen. As I write, G4S or some other outsourcing behemoth will be putting up barriers around the Manchester conference zone to conceal nothing – absolutely nothing.

I’ve never known the run up to a party conference to feel so lame, so uninspiring, so flat and lacking in energy and vitality.  There are no rumours, no conflicts and little life.  Even the unions are silent.  I guess everyone must be happy. The election is in the bag. The next Labour government will sweep all before it and rule for a generation, creating Jerusalem in our midst. Oh, happy days.

Out there, in the wide-awake club, the ice caps melt, the eurozone teeters on the brink of collapse, the Tories rip the hope out of the lives of millions of young people, and the CBI calls for what’s left of the public sector to be privatised.  Neo-liberalism continues unabashed and untamed.

In fairness, Labour did have a half good idea about a British Investment Bank – but it was nicked by The Thick of It and then by Vince Cable. It's still got some other policies, like a five point-plan no one can remember, that would make virtually no difference to economic growth, and a promise to charge students £6,000 fees. Three thousand pounds more then they paid before but hey, £3,000 less than the Tories. Who says politics isn't about real choices? But it's giving little else away – that would be risky wouldn’t it?

Compare and contrast two things. First, Labour in 1994-97, when the party was last in opposition. There are no bigger critics of what became of New Labour than this happy scribe, but at least it had a sense of energy and ambition. Ideas frothed. New think-tanks bubbled up. Tireless work went into strategy and language. The "third way" was endlessly debated.  Of course, most of it turned out to be nonsense but at least the party had a go.

Second, look at the energy in the Tory party. Pushy backbenchers churn out tomes like Britannia Unchained that fizz with new policy ideas. Boris Johnson bounces round the fringes of the government – threatening a right-wing regime that is popular.  And Tim Montgomerie and chums set up Conservative Voice as an alternative government-in-waiting.  They all know where they want to take their party, the country and how. 

Labour, meanwhile, looks limp. Laid low to the level of a coma by an opinion poll lead that merely flatters to deceive. The decline of the Lib Dem vote just helps the Tories. The economy is bound to pick up. Of course, Labour might win – but what then? What do we do about the bond market, the public finances or the euro crisis? Labour is still hooked on the same political economy of setting finance free and redistributing the crumbs from the table. Hence its outright objection to a financial transaction tax (FTT) levied in Europe, making no attempt whatsoever to persuade the USA of its obvious virtue in stabilising markets and supporting essential social expenditure.

The party has nothing to say on public sector reform, nothing to say on welfare reform and nothing to say on climate change. If they have, then I, and everyone else, has missed it. Why not a genuine Green New Deal or an FTT? Why aren’t we pushing harder on a living wage, a German-style KfW environmental bank, real separation of retail and investment banking, new rules on takeovers, a national carers scheme, taxes on land and wealth and so much more?

This accidental or intended strategy seems to take its cue from the Australian Labour Party circa 1998-2001.  It was called the "small target" strategy. The party had almost been wiped out at the previous election and nervous shadow ministers decided the best chance to win was to stop rocking the boat and become a "small target" for Conservative attacks, on economic credibility in particular. If the party curled up into a tiny enough ball no one would notice and it might just win. But the ALP had no credible story that could capture the popular imagination or revive the party’s base. They lost even more seats.

I’m sure Ed will make a good speech – he might even make a great speech.  After all, he’s been right about responsible capitalism – but the age of the speech as a political lever is over. It’s now the age of emotion, action, campaigns and alliance building. Hope is loaded onto Jon Cruddas's policy review, but what if everything is vetted and stripped of any meaningful content? If it's safety first and safety last, then the party is doomed to disappoint.

The serious point is this. Capitalism has done two things – with devastating effect on Labour and the wider left. First it went up and then it went in. It went up to a global level– in so doing it cut itself free from any democratic accountability. Second, it went into our minds – as our identities and aspirations became steadily defined by what we bought.  The combination of financialisation and consumerisation destroyed the salience of class politics. Without a homogenous, organised and disciplined working class base Labour has become increasingly lost. It will stay lost until it finds or, better still, creates a new moral politics, new constituencies of interest and finally accepts that it's no longer 1945. The world has moved on and has become more complex and pluralistic.  Against the backdrop of the biggest crisis capitalism has ever suffered, Labour just looks tired.  

It's not as if the party is even being complacent – no one I talk to from the right or the left is under any illusion that winning will only be a slightly better disaster than losing.  Journalists and campaigners are gleefully calling and emailing me to express their relief that, for the first time in their lives, they aren’t going to conference. And who can blame them? Who wants to spend a week listening to Labour snore?

Sleep tight, my party.

Neal Lawson's column appears weekly on The Staggers.

9 comments

Mrs.Josephine Hyde-Hartley 's picture

According to other media sources the leader of the Labour party has been telling people;
“But there is a bigger message also about the Labour Party that I lead - I am not for pushing people out of the Labour Party. I want more people in the Labour Party.
“There is no future for this party as one sectional interest of society. We must be the party of the private sector just as much as the party of the public sector.”
And the unite ( or is it untie) union leader ,Mr McCluskey told the Independent newspaper: “We should only be supporting those constituencies where their vision of the type of future that we want is in line with ours.”

In my view as somebody who understands and believes in only the best public services - schools and all; Unless the powers that be in this world sort themselves out properly, they will not be deemed worthy of any notice at all from ordinary members of the public, let alone a mark on a ballot paper - or indeed any other signature or mark of recognition, that may or may not end up taken in vain and used against one.

-The union man is coming across as a bit twisted -even conservative - if it's true he thinks it's ok to to use democracy and democratic constituencies to support only " his kind".

But even so- what worries me most of all as an ordinary member of the public is how dreadful are the collective effects already made manifest because of these two seemingly disparate views -

The individual lives of me and my family should be taken on trust and on merit alone as equal members of society - I for one am not going to bother even looking at anymore risk type assessment forms - dished out by those extremists who would spoil the lives of my family - whether such form is filled in or not.

PS We may of course share this message as appropriate or necessary to improve things all round.

uglyfatbloke's picture

Charles Patrick O'Brien has a point...Even the Guardian was started to admit that Lamont is not becoming a match for Salmond - if anything she is getting worse and some SNP MSPs are concerned that she is so inept she may get a sympathy vote as a 'poor old soul'.
Now that she has adopted Osborne's rhetoric and economics there will be ructions in the Labour party in Scotland; the resentment caused by firing some people she did n't like (though she was certainly right to do so) will fester and there will soon be a new set of Labour people briefing Curran, Murphy etc. behind Lamont's back.- if there's not one already.
The factionalism, the toadying to the Orange Order,the failure to go for FFA (the choice that most people prefer) and Lamont's conversion to the Conservatives ..and of course having failed chancellor (but successful posh-boy) Darling at the head of the 'No' campaign will do nothing to help a Labour recovery in Scotland. If the 'yes' campaign wins the absence of 40 Labour MPS from Scotland will make it harder for Ed to become PM....not impossible, but definitely harder.

cassforquestions's picture

My Labour Party Conference predictions:

Cassforquestions. com

Charles Patrick O'Brien's picture

I think there will be some big frights for Labour especially in Scotland.There is a big chance that the YES vote shall win through,and the inept Lamont in Scotland is the best ammunition the Independence parties have.
We in Scotland never bought into the false economy of artificially high house prices we understood the reasoning and the pitfalls,and now they are all happening,and I am glad to be going down the independence path.

M .Wenzl's picture

Sadly, if Neal Lawson wrote Labour's electoral manifesto, people wouldn't vote for them.

LabourMan's picture

I disagree with Neal Lawson on New Labour and I am surprised he did not defect to the Liberal Democrats or the Greens but instead of carping, I urge Neal Lawson to team up with Blue Labour, Progress and the leadership to start the energy going. When I look at the Tories, I see the Free Enteprise Group, the Deep Blue Group, the 301 Group, the 2020 Group, the 40 Group and Conservative Voice. We need something similar in Labour which works together and promotes campaigning as well as policy discussions. Also, I think Lawson is being very ungenerous in terms of policy. The Investment Bank was not really nicked, the 5 Point Plan would make a big difference and the economy might not pick up because of the continued austerity coupled with the Eurozone crisis. We will see a few more years of bumbling along the bottom and very sluggish growth.

Mark Cantrell's picture

Of course they look limp and tired. They're caught in a bind. Labour wants to be a respectable party of British capitalism, supporting and enhancing British business -- and we all know that effectively means the City -- but they need to try and appeal to some generic 'everyman' whilst seeming more radical than they really are, but it's a fine line to walk because they don't want to scare the people that really matter -- the executives and coupon clippers of UK plc.

So they might talk up a few crumbs, even chuck us a few if they end up back in Govt, but that's all it is -- crumbs sputtered out of their mouths while they lecture us on their limp social vision. Really, it's just the political party equivalent the corporate social responsibility rhetoric you get off big corporates.

Stuart Eels's picture

I think this bloke is being rather negative, I'm sure there will be plenty to have a good laugh out loud time.

Herbert's picture

No, Blair isn't coming back. He's too busy making money and avoiding arrest.

Latest tweets