[A-List] UK state: New Labour

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

Speak of the devil and he's sure to appear, and not just in today's Guardian
but in longer form in the Spectator, no less. Here he is at his toadying
best, invoking the spirit of the Grate Margaret...


Boldness, more boldness

Predictions of Blair's political death are much exaggerated. Like Thatcher,
he has the resilience needed for renewal

Peter Mandelson
Thursday June 26, 2003
The Guardian

Don't be taken in by the media's hyperbole; by comparison with summers past,
this government is not having a particularly rough time. Alastair Campbell's
comfortable survial at the hands of his inquisitors yesterday exposed the
synthetic nature of the rage directed against the government. Mr Blair is
routinely said to be "reeling", "fuming" or "fumbling" and having the
toughest two weeks of his premiership or the worst crisis since he came to
power. But those with long memories and perspective know that we are light
years away from the storms that used to rock Mrs Thatcher's ship and the
internal battles that tore apart John Major's administration.

Compared with previous Labour governments, Mr Blair's current wobbles are a
sideshow. Remember the sense of crisis and electoral collapse that followed
the Bevanite split in 1950-51, the economic crisis and political defeats in
1967-69, or the winter of discontent in 1978-79. For all their achievements,
what these administrations demonstrated was the difficulty for Labour of
renewing or sustaining itself in office, not least because too many in the
party preferred to undermine their government than help renew it.

It does not mean that everything has gone perfectly well. But the Labour
party's cohesion has survived backing for one of the most controversial
international actions, in Iraq, of the postwar period; and the government
has an agreed position on the European single currency from which no member
of the Cabinet dissents.

The government has also delivered unprecedented economic stability, historic
investment in public services, much needed reform of the welfare system,
devolution of government and elements of a constitutional revolution, plus a
remaking of Britain's relationships in Europe. You have to accept that
recent wobbles are small earthquakes leaving no one dead.

Does this mean that every Labour MP can go off on holiday in July without a
care in the world? Of course not. Media gaffes are magnified because of New
Labour's legendary prowess in this area. But tiredness should not be
confused with terminal "decay", as some BBC political correspondents
suggest. The nagging feeling that the New Labour "project" has lost momentum
is because too few in government talk publicly and convincingly about their
mission rather than that its purpose no longer exists.

The government's opponents will be swift to take advantage of any wrong
ministerial step. And there are those on the old left and old right of the
Labour party who may quietly hope New Labour will come an embarrassing
cropper. But this is the flotsam and jetsam of politics, and significantly
more of Mr Blair's critics are concerned about the government's direction
because they want it to achieve more, not because they want to destroy it.
Outright oppositionists should not be confused with malcontents and
worriers.

Most important is whether the government's policies are right; and whether
it is pursuing them thoroughly. The answer to the first question is yes. To
the second, not entirely.

A strong public service ethos - and rising incomes and morale amongst
staff - have flowed back into the NHS and education. With more money has
come reform and a range of providers are emerging, for example, with
specialist schools, city academies and voluntary schools. But the opening up
could go further - schools are still hedged around by bureaucracy and the
system is still broadly closed.

New legislation will radically change the criminal justice system, including
the rules of evidence, previous convictions, sentencing and how court
hearings are held. Big problems remain: much of the court system and police
service is still unmodernised, holding back the fight against crime. And
transport? The government's 10-year plan will not in itself result in a
first-class infrastructure, nor will reliance on public spending alone. More
radical ways of funding public transport, roads and city systems need to be
devised and long-term solutions advanced.

Making hard choices to prepare Britain for an increasingly uncertain future
is the leitmotif of New Labour. No doubt some in the party fear that
Blairite radicalism will lose votes. But abandoning the hard lessons of the
1980s and 90s and adopting a left conservatism is not the answer: that is
the long-term achilles heel of the government.

In 1986, Mrs Thatcher faced a similar barrage of media and chattering class
criticism. By agreeing to let America use British bases to bomb Libya she
opened herself to attack, not least from her own party - most of it, as she
reflected in her memoirs, tinged with anti-Americanism. At the same time her
ideological soulmate Keith Joseph left the Cabinet. Ex-ministers were
swirling round accusing her of not listening. And she complained that her
achievements were not getting through to the public. All this and the
Westland affair left her way behind in the polls with commentators writing
her political obituary.

Her victory a year later, after revealing the "next steps forward" at the
autumn party conference, showed the capacity of a resilient and focused
government to renew itself, and the false dawns that are the hallmark of
opposition parties that have not changed enough to win.

Tony Blair's determination should never be underestimated. He has another
great advantage - the popular appeal of centre-left values in an uncertain
world. The government has the self-confidence and firepower to renew itself.
And the durability of a government is not best judged by the fickle media,
but by the underlying tectonic plates that take longer to shift. The public
chose this government to create opportunity and security for the many, to
modernise Britain's institutions and public services, and to fund this on
the basis of fairness. That rationale remains as strong and relevant now as
it did in 1997. But to retain its strong position, the government must take
the next bold steps with even greater clarity and purpose. Of course
presentation is important. But what government needs now is primarily
policy-driven, not media-managed performance.

· This is an edited version of an article in this week's Spectator magazine