Skip to main content

Labour needs a better narrative

Labour has rarely been kind to the party's former leaders.   The memberships, or activists at least, are quick to slate them as 'traitors'.  Decades later, the view is different.

This was certainly so with Harold Wilson who was despised on the right of the party and abandoned by the left.  Labour tends to over-state its failures and minimise its successes.   Now we look back and see how successful Wilson was in the circumstances of his time.

This has also been so with Tony Blair.  The record of Tony Blair's government is remarkable by any standard.  His sin, for the left of Labour, was that he hunted with the hare and the hounds.  He set out to make capitalism work better.  It was a laudable aim and his achievements were considerable.

Blair's government massively increased funding of the NHS and waiting lists and times tumbled.  It made inroads in reducing child poverty with targetted policies.  It reduced pensioner poverty.  It put more police officers on the streets.  It produced remarkable constitutional reform with devolution to the nations, and it pushed the peace process in Northern Ireland to an agreement.

It transformed our human rights laws and introduced openness and accountability with freedom of information legislation and the Human Rights Act in 1998.

But this article isn't written simply to praise Tony Blair.  It is to make the point that very little of this achievement has been presented by the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn.   Even the minimum wage was a major achievement of the Blair years.   The Labour Party should be writing its history and not leaving it to others to denigrate it.

When I left school in 1964, I went to work in a branch of the Home Office.  It was just at the time of the first Wilson Government with a slender majority after thirteen long Tory years.  Most of those working in the office were shocked by the result of the election that October. My immediate superior told me that Wilson would bankrupt the country, just as they had done under Attlee.

I found that odd, given that the Attlee government had achieved so much, but I was sixteen and a bit wet behind the ears.

Of course, Labour did not bankrupt the country.  When I read the history of it I found that not only had Attlee's government introduced the welfare state and the NHS but that during the years that followed the war the national debt plummetted.  Of course, it would because we were no longer funding the war.  But increased welfare spending and spending on infrastructure didn't bankrupt the country.

On the contrary,  as people were put back to work and wages rose, so tax revenue increased to pay for social funding.  Libraries and schools and council housing were built.  People's lives were transformed, and opportunities created.  My generation, in particular, benefited substantially from the welfare state.

Decades have passed since then, and we can now see that far from Labour governments bankrupting the country, they tend to run smaller budget deficits!  Their record on the economy is, in general, just as good if not better than the Tories.

The Tories tend at some point to push up unemployment, and paying for that increased the budget deficit under the Tories.

But if you consider the perceptions.  The generally held view is that the Tories are good with the economy and Labour bad.     This is why it was easy enough for Boris Johnson to suggest that Labour always left the country in an economic crisis.   It remained unchallenged.  But it is wrong.  It is a distortion of history.

But that distorted history is aided by the tendency of the left to critique Labour governments.  They use the language of failure.  They call former leaders 'traitors'.  They question the 'socialist' credentials of former leaders.  But by doing so they add to the Tory narrative of socialist failure.

Already, the knives are out for Jeremy Corbyn.  He has not yet stood down, but he is being blamed for the election defeat.  Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonell have accepted their responsibility as leaders.  Yet the knives are plunged.   History is being written.  Blame apportioned.  Even the word 'traitor' is used.

Yet, this is before anyone has been able to fully reflect on what went wrong.

Of course, we all have our ideas on that.  But we should be wary of writing a Tory history of Labour.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

The secret life of Giant Pandas

Giant pandas, Ailuropoda melanoleuca , have usually been regarded as solitary creatures, coming together only to mate; but recent studies have begun to reveal a secret social life for these enigmatic bears.  GPS tracking shows they cross each others path more often than previously thought, and spend time together.  What we don't know is what they are doing when together.  Photo by  Sid Balachandran  on  Unsplash For such large mammals, pandas have relatively small home ranges. Perhaps this is no surprise. Pandas feed almost exclusively on bamboo. The only real threat to pandas has come from humans. No wonder then that the panda is the symbol of the WWF.  Pandas communicate with one another through vocalization and scent marking. They spray urine, claw tree trunks and rub against objects to mark their paths, yet they do not appear to be territorial as individuals.  Pandas are 99% vegetarian, but, oddly, their digestive system is more typical of a carnivore. For the 1% of their diet

Work Capability Assessments cause suffering for the mentally ill

People suffering from mental health problems are often the most vulnerable when seeking help. Mental health can have a major impact on work, housing, relationships and finances. The Work Capability Assessments (WCA) thus present a particular challenge to those suffering mental illness.  The mentally ill also are often the least able to present their case. Staff involved in assessments lack sufficient expertise or training to understand mental health issues and how they affect capability. Because of  concerns that Work Capability Assessments will have a particularly detrimental effect on the mentally ill,  an  e-petition  on the government web site calls on the Department of Work and Pensions to exclude people with complex mental health problems such as paranoid schizophrenia and personality disorders. Problems with the WCA  have been highlighted in general by the fact that up to 78% of 'fit to work' decisions are  being overturned on appeal. It is all to the good that they