The challenge facing Labour

Don’t let the Tories win the argument on the management of public services.

I'm afraid in my previous post I gestured rather airily in the direction of some "fundamental questions of political economy" that the candidates for the Labour leadership need to answer, without specifying what those questions might be. I don't think I'd be able to better for clarity or precision Chris Dillow's account of the challenge facing Labour as it tries to determine what a post-New Labour version of social democracy might look like.

Dillow offers five reasons why New Labour's conception of social democracy is dead. I'd like to draw your attention here to two of those reasons. First, he points out that Labour's "promise of macroeconomic stability" was false (John Gray said something similar in the piece about Ralph Miliband that I discussed yesterday):

Macroeconomic stability was mere good luck which has passed, not something which it is in the power of governments to create.

The challenge for an intelligent left is to ask: how can we protect the worst-off from macroeconomic fluctuations, given that macro management is insufficient? This requires either more use of insurance markets, or a welfare state that puts a higher weight upon reducing risk than upon incentives.

Gray, of course, was fairly pessimistic about the ability of a future Labour government to "protect the worst-off from macroeconomic fluctuations". But he and Dillow agree that figuring whether and how it is possible to do this in the "globalised world" to which Tony Blair's memoir is, in part, a deluded incantation is a task the centre left needs to take very seriously.

Second, Dillow makes a point about managerialism and the public sector (something David Miliband and Jon Cruddas allude to in their Guardian piece that I also blogged about yesterday):

The inefficiencies in the public sector generated by top-down management might have been tolerable when no one worried about government borrowing. However, even though concern about the deficit is grotesquely overblown, this is not the world we'll live in in the foreseeable future. Governments will have to pay more attention to value for money. This requires that public-sector workers be empowered, as they know best where inefficiencies really lie. But New Labour's managerialism prevented it from seeing this.

The critique of managerialism is something that the left has allowed the Tories (for whom it goes proxy for an assault on the public sector tout court) to take ownership of and it's time it wrested it back.

Jonathan Derbyshire is Managing Editor of Prospect. He was formerly Culture Editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

Let's face it: supporting Spurs is basically a form of charity

Now, for my biggest donation yet . . .

I gazed in awe at the new stadium, the future home of Spurs, wondering where my treasures will go. It is going to be one of the architectural wonders of the modern world (football stadia division), yet at the same time it seems ancient, archaic, a Roman ruin, very much like an amphitheatre I once saw in Croatia. It’s at the stage in a new construction when you can see all the bones and none of the flesh, with huge tiers soaring up into the sky. You can’t tell if it’s going or coming, a past perfect ruin or a perfect future model.

It has been so annoying at White Hart Lane this past year or so, having to walk round walkways and under awnings and dodge fences and hoardings, losing all sense of direction. Millions of pounds were being poured into what appeared to be a hole in the ground. The new stadium will replace part of one end of the present one, which was built in 1898. It has been hard not to be unaware of what’s going on, continually asking ourselves, as we take our seats: did the earth move for you?

Now, at long last, you can see what will be there, when it emerges from the scaffolding in another year. Awesome, of course. And, har, har, it will hold more people than Arsenal’s new home by 1,000 (61,000, as opposed to the puny Emirates, with only 60,000). At each home game, I am thinking about the future, wondering how my treasures will fare: will they be happy there?

No, I don’t mean Harry Kane, Danny Rose and Kyle Walker – local as well as national treasures. Not many Prem teams these days can boast quite as many English persons in their ranks. I mean my treasures, stuff wot I have been collecting these past 50 years.

About ten years ago, I went to a shareholders’ meeting at White Hart Lane when the embryonic plans for the new stadium were being announced. I stood up when questions were called for and asked the chairman, Daniel Levy, about having a museum in the new stadium. I told him that Man United had made £1m the previous year from their museum. Surely Spurs should make room for one in the brave new mega-stadium – to show off our long and proud history, delight the fans and all those interested in football history and make a few bob.

He mumbled something – fluent enough, as he did go to Cambridge – but gave nothing away, like the PM caught at Prime Minister’s Questions with an unexpected question.

But now it is going to happen. The people who are designing the museum are coming from Manchester to look at my treasures. They asked for a list but I said, “No chance.” I must have 2,000 items of Spurs memorabilia. I could be dead by the time I finish listing them. They’ll have to see them, in the flesh, and then they’ll be free to take away whatever they might consider worth having in the new museum.

I’m awfully kind that way, partly because I have always looked on supporting Spurs as a form of charity. You don’t expect any reward. Nor could you expect a great deal of pleasure, these past few decades, and certainly not the other day at Liverpool when they were shite. But you do want to help them, poor things.

I have been downsizing since my wife died, and since we sold our Loweswater house, and I’m now clearing out some of my treasures. I’ve donated a very rare Wordsworth book to Dove Cottage, five letters from Beatrix Potter to the Armitt Library in Ambleside, and handwritten Beatles lyrics to the British Library. If Beckham and I don’t get a knighthood in the next honours list, I will be spitting.

My Spurs stuff includes programmes going back to 1910, plus recent stuff like the Opus book, that monster publication, about the size of a black cab. Limited editions cost £8,000 a copy in 2007. I got mine free, as I did the introduction and loaned them photographs. I will be glad to get rid of it. It’s blocking the light in my room.

Perhaps, depending on what they want, and they might take nothing, I will ask for a small pourboire in return. Two free tickets in the new stadium. For life. Or longer . . . 

Hunter Davies is a journalist, broadcaster and profilic author perhaps best known for writing about the Beatles. He is an ardent Tottenham fan and writes a regular column on football for the New Statesman.

This article first appeared in the 16 February 2017 issue of the New Statesman, The New Times