29.03.2006

Labour versus Blairism

The events of the last couple of weeks have seen Blair go into crisis, writes Graham Bash of Labour Left Briefing. The question is, to what extent is it terminal?

We should not underestimate how significant the vote on the Education Bill was. For the first time since the Iraq war, Blair has relied on Tory votes - an important step towards a coalition 'national government'. Nor should we underestimate the significance of Jack Dromey's whistle-blowing on the multi-million-pound loans scandal. This goes beyond what much of the press has said - namely that it is a move on behalf of Gordon Brown.

It also reveals two other things. Firstly, the fact that Blair has dodged the most basic accountability on party finances. Secondly, it shows a division between traditional rightwing Labour and trade union bureaucrats and New Labour, which is an altogether different phenomenon.

The former are becoming more and more sceptical about New Labour, not only in relation to its policy positions, such as education, health and pensions, but also as to whether New Labour can deliver electorally - which, after all, was the main benefit it appeared to bring and was the cover behind which Labour's right wing could justify its capitulation.

A good example of this divide comes with the news that Unison Labour Link is suspending its support for the party for the local elections, apparently with the support of the top leadership. This is unheard of. It is, of course, connected to the fact that Unison, among other unions, is in the midst of a serious dispute over local government pensions and can see no reason to subsidise those with whom it is in conflict on this question.

To what extent is Blair's crisis terminal? I do not think this can be answered until the outcome of the local elections on May 4 is known. But there will come a point when Labour MPs will stomach no more. This is not just to do with policies, but their own political survival. Some Labour MPs, of course, vote on principle, but to get large numbers to turn against Blair would require the realisation that their own position in Westminster is at stake.

If Labour has a meltdown in May, I believe there could well be a revolt by MPs who up to now have been relatively loyal to Blair and who would not otherwise be prepared to twist the knife. I do not buy the argument that it will be Blair and his close supporters who will necessarily decide the date that he goes. That could be the case if Labour avoids disaster on May 4. But the question is likely to be taken out of his hands if it does not. I can see a clear parallel with the circumstances that led to the departure of Margaret Thatcher.

What should be the attitude of the Labour left? Clearly we have to act intelligently and in a way that will bring with us the broadest section of the parliamentary party and the trade union movement. However, in the event that Blair goes earlier rather than later, it is essential that the left uses that space to demonstrate the visibility of opposition that goes way beyond the traditional left.

It would be vital that it is not left to Gordon Brown to make the running on the basis that he is bound to be the next leader. A Brown coronation would be a disaster, and even if eventually he became leader, which seems probable, the left and its allies must demonstrate to the broader movement and population as a whole that a Labour Party worthy of the name still exists and can mobilise support throughout the movement against the politics of New Labour. A Brown leadership, if it is going to be a Blair leadership under a different name with the same set of policies, would be no advance. Indeed, in some circumstances, it could even represent a renewal of New Labour - just as John Major's premiership represented a renewal of Thatcherism by giving it a broader base. That is why the left must not be silenced.

Of course, there is a danger that the left, having raised its head above the parapet, could be shot down and humiliated. But the greater danger is that it will miss the moment when it is possible to confront the existing leadership. I am not suggesting that a left leadership challenge would have any prospect of success, but I do think that a campaign could give rise to the best possible expression of the alternative Labour policies that are required, as opposed to those of the New Labour government.

The left must not miss the opportunity to take the lead in opposition to imperialist war in Iraq and possibly Iran, to attacks on civil liberties, such as the terrorism bill and ID cards, to the privatisation of health and education, and to the attacks on public sector pensions. It must also come out clearly in favour of restoring trade union rights and the railways to public ownership and allowing councils to invest directly in public housing. These are key issues where, potentially, there is a massive cleavage between traditional Labour policies and New Labour Tory policies - it is easy to point to the fact that Blair can only rely on Tory votes on education, for example, because he is delivering Tory policies. If he could get away with it, he would do the same on health as well.

This fact, together with the possibility of an electoral catastrophe, will allow the left to provide leadership for the whole of the Labour section of the party. The best expression of this would come with a left leadership campaign - as opposed to standing aside while perhaps some of the more unreliable elements decide to mount a challenge. If the left takes the initiative, such a campaign could pull in support from broad sections of the party, including the centre and even the traditionalist right. The best result would be a left leadership challenge on traditional Labour policies, making clear the deep divisions on all the key issues.

Who can be relied upon to put forward Labour policies in the most coherent manner? Only the left. The right can be fair weather allies who may be prepared to put the boot in on Blair - only then to make their peace with Brown.

All this is necessarily inexact, since we do not yet know what awaits New Labour on May 4 - although, from where I stand, it does not look good.