10.05.2006

Into the dustbin of history

Graham Bash of 'Labour Left Briefing' looks forward to Blair's demise in the aftermath of the May 4 local elections

The local election results on May 4 were bordering on devastating: we saw Labour down to 26% and the Tories above 40% for the first time in a generation. What it means is that is it now far less likely that Labour will win the next general election and form a majority government unless there is a decisive change of political course by the party.

I did a lot of work locally in Hackney in these elections for Labour. I was keen to do this not simply for the effect my efforts could have on the result, but because I learn a tremendous amount. The message I got from people was quite unequivocal. It was an active hatred of Blair and a depth of anger from many about the Iraq war that was sobering.

One response from a longstanding Labour voter will stay with me. He told me: "I would like to vote Labour; but there just isn't a Labour Party to vote for. Get rid of Blair and Blairism and I will be delighted to be a Labour voter once more."

The attitude of that solid Labour man was not exceptional. This was a message we were getting from many, many people. In my area, due to some good organisation, the Labour vote held up very well, but overall the result was a disaster. What I think is of particular interest is New Labour's own response to the drubbing the electors gave them.

The voters decisively rejected New Labour, humiliating them at the polls. Yet, if anything, the subsequent cabinet reshuffle reinforces its Blairite content. It is remarkable that Jack Straw can be sacked for being too 'independent'. What sealed his fate is his stance that it was inconceivable that this government would ever join a US-led military assault on Iran.

For Blair, that was a step too far and Straw had to go. It is a slap in the face of both the party and the electorate, as is the appointment of the unspeakable Hazel Blears as our chair. And, of course, it is a joy to see the back of Charles Clarke. But the left has to be very wary about how we celebrate his downfall. We must make sure that there is no hint that we in any way endorse the chauvinist hysteria about foreign criminals that actually drove him from office.

What we have to concentrate on is the serious erosion of Labour's base. This has directly led to an increase in abstention and - worryingly - a substantial revival of the Tories. Also, in some areas such a Barking, Labour's traditional vote has gone to the British National Party. That is a dangerous development and an absolute indictment of the legacy of Blairism. It is a product of the total failure of this government to connect with the interests and concerns of its traditional working class base.

People who enthusiastically turned out to get rid of the Tories in 1997 have found that the Tories are still in power, if not in office. They are disillusioned and are turning away both from the Labour Party and from politics more generally. When people turn their backs on the labour movement and the political process, we are facing a crisis.

What does it mean for activists in the labour movement? It can only mean challenging for the future of the Labour Party - the very existence of a political party of the working class now hangs by a thread. I have also stated that the New Labour project is to separate the Labour Party from its historic trade union base and, if successful, it would destroy the party's very nature as a working class entity.

Unions acquiesce

All this talk of an orderly transition from Blair to Brown leaves me cold. The left does not want an orderly transition. I want Blair to be driven from office, with his and New Labour's treacherous policies in tatters! Of course, we want to get rid of the leader of this alien political trend in our ranks - that goes without saying. But the rot goes far deeper than that. There is no point in replacing Blair with Brown if New Labourism remains intact. What is critical is that Brown is the main architect of most of the economic policies of New Labour.

What stands out for me is the fact that Blair remains in office because he is allowed to do so. Not only by the supine parliamentary party, but also by the leaders of the trade unions. Were there to be a resolution from one of the big four unions to this year's Labour conference calling for a leadership contest, it would be very difficult for the New Labour apparatchiks to manoeuvre that off the conference agenda. It would get support from most of the unions and from a considerable section of the constituency parties.

Unfortunately, there seems little chance of this. However, the point I'm trying to stress is that if Blair survives this crisis, goes in his own time and there is that orderly transition they are so desperate to ensure, then this would be a defeat for the left and - more importantly - a massive defeat for the working class. We would have to ask serious questions of the trade union leaderships under those circumstances. It could spell the end of the Labour Party and 100 years of independent working class political representation.

At the moment, Blair survives courtesy of the trade union leaders. They could, if they wanted, begin the process of burying Blair - and Blairism - tomorrow. If they need to have their resolve stiffened, all they need do is listen to the rank and file of their own organisations and the anger that is being articulated there.

The Labour Representation Committee - which has its annual conference on July 22 - must make itself a focus for this fightback. John McDonnell MP, the chair of the LRC, has made it clear that there must be a fundamental challenge to New Labour to transform the structures of the party, to change our policies and to change our leadership. All of this must go hand in hand. It is necessary for the LRC to embody this root and branch challenge, but it cannot do it alone. It will not be able to do it unless the trade unions and the parliamentarians play their role. They have an incentive, of course. For example, if there is not a fundamental change of direction soon, we will see swathes of the parliamentary party decimated at the next election and the trade unions will have to face up to another Tory government after 10 years of New Labour.

There is an opportunity to get rid of Blair - the movement must seize the moment. Drive him from office and hold the new leader to ransom! That must become the slogan and programme of the left and the trade unions. Unless we have the strength and resolve to do this, then the future is bleak.

Respect

Lastly, I have used this column so far only to talk about the struggle in the Labour Party. However, I must again comment on the prospects of the left outside Labour, as revealed by the results on May 4. If anything, it is even bleaker.

Clearly, all the attempts at working class representation outside Labour have failed. I am aware that there were some decent votes for Respect in Tower Hamlets (although I take the view that the overall result was probably disappointing for them). But none of the left alternatives on offer can represent anything more than a local challenge, at best. They can never be a national electoral alternative to Labour from the left - I have said many times in these pages that there is not the political space for it to happen.

Unless we fight for the Labour Party to be the political representative of the working class - which it clearly is not at the moment - then we are giving up on this key struggle. However dismal I feel about Labour's performance on May 4, I see nothing outside its ranks that suggests to me that I should change my mind on this.