New Leader, New Labour?
A Seminar Paper By Benjamin Holst Kjeldsen
|
|
| Published in 1997, this paper aimed to establish Tony Blair's role in reforming the Labour Party in his then three years as leader. Emphasis was given to Tony Blair's person, the policy changes in the Party, the revision of Clause IV of the Party's constitution and the concept of stakeholding. |
The paper is now outdated and of historical interest only. It reflects the situation in the beginning of 1997, just before Blair was elected PM. No attempts have been made to update the paper or the references.
|
|
|---|
| This is the full text of a seminar paper written in 1997 in response to the fourth year exam in British Politics and Society which forms part of the MA Degree Programme in Translation and Interpretation (English) at the Copenhagen Business School, Denmark. The findings in the paper represent the views of the author and not those of the business school. At the end of the paper you will find a reference list. All sources are included in brackets in the text. Please consult the end of this document for full details on authors and publishers. | |
Take notice that most external links will no longer be operational.
Don't forget to visit my home page.
Click here for translation services.
List of Contents
Introduction
Tony Blair's Personal Background
Tony Blair's Political Career
Policy Changes under Tony Blair
The Revision of Clause IV
Stakeholding
Image and Unity under Tony Blair
Conclusion
Notes
Bibliography
Introduction
In the 1980s, the Labour Party experienced a period of internal strife and extremely poor electoral performance. When Neil Kinnock became leader, he was aware the Labour Party needed to enlarge its electoral base to include the middle classes. The shrinking and increasingly diversified working class and the reduction in union membership necessitated a reform of the Party. Labour had to adapt to the time in which it existed.
In 1992, Kinnock was confident the Labour Party would win the election. He had transformed his party into one resembling the modern social democratic parties of mainland Europe. Gone were perceived electoral liabilities such as unilateral disarmament, withdrawal from the then EC and increased taxation and spending. The electorate did not have confidence in him, however. The ghosts of socialism were conjured up by the Conservatives who held the poor handling of the economy and the unions by the previous Labour Government against Kinnock's Labour Party.
In 1997, Tony Blair moved into 11 Downing Street with the largest majority ever obtained by Labour. The Labour Party under Tony Blair claims to differ from "old" Labour in many respects. Two differences are readily identified. Tony Blair is a younger and more dynamic leader than most of his predecessors, and the Party promotes itself as New Labour.
This paper aims to establish Tony Blair's role in modernising the Labour Party and preparing it for Government. In this process, the new in New Labour will be examined. The emphasis is on Blair's three years as leader and New Labour is seen in the context of the modernisation already undertaken as a result of the Policy Review. Tony Blair's personal and political background and his early contributions to the reform of Labour are discussed in the first sections. Subsequently, Labour's policy changes under the leadership of Blair are established. It is then argued that the rewording of Clause IV of the Labour Party's constitution and the Stakeholder Idea are the most important contributions by Tony Blair to the concept of New Labour. These two issues are examined in individual sections. In the final section, the image Tony Blair has attempted to convey of himself and his party is assessed through a comparison with the actual substance of New Labour. It is established that Tony Blair's modernising project has partly been one of improving the Party's electability. It has also been an attempt to transfer his own set of values to Labour and thus provide an ideological and pragmatic platform for Labour in Government.
Other factors than those relating to changes in the Labour Party have contributed to making Tony Blair Prime Minister. Especially the Conservative sleaze and disunity have helped Labour win the 1997 election convincingly. Arguably, some people voted for change rather than for what New Labour stands for. However, the focus of this paper will be on Tony Blair and New Labour's attempt to modernise the Party in the British post-Thatcher era.
Back to the start
Tony Blair's Personal Background
At the age of ten, Tony Blair experienced the single most formative event of his life. His father, a successful Conservative barrister, had a stroke. He barely survived and lost his ability to speak for three years. At about the same time, Blair's sister turned ill and had to undergo regular hospital treatment for some years. Tony Blair recalled the experience 33 years later at his third conference as leader of the Labour Party. On this occasion he claimed that his family's fate made him realise the necessity of the NHS and that this was partly responsible for making him join the Labour Party rather than follow his father's political conviction (Leathley, 1996).
When he learned about the stroke, the headmaster of Tony Blair's school sat down with the boy and prayed (Sopel, 1995: p.9). This instituted in the young Blair the germs of strong religious beliefs. He was confirmed while studying at Oxford (Rentoul, 1996: p.46). Here, he got to know a small group of students who introduced him to the social side of Christianity. They read the works of the Scottish Christian socialist philosopher John Macmurray who would inspire Blair's political beliefs profoundly. Macmurray wrote, among other things, about the concept of community and he regarded the family as the base of society (Rentoul, 1996: p.42). He argued that individuals are shaped by their relationships with each other and that society thus is made up by interdependent individuals.
Blair considered becoming a minister but found in Christian Socialism a way to marry his religious beliefs with his social concern. Christianity is at the core of his present political ideas, though not always conspicuously so, as he "can't stand politicians who go on about religion" (Blair, in Hitchens, 1995).
At college, however, his political ideas were not yet fully developed. He joined a rock-and-roll band of dubious quality called Ugly Rumours and took part in some drama performances. These interests are reflected in his "young" image and rhetorical power today.
After college, Blair joined the chambers of the Labourite barrister Derry Irvine as a pupil. Irvine has influenced Blair's political career greatly through his help and advice. He remains a close friend and adviser to Blair today and is now Lord Chancellor in the Blair Government. During his time at the chambers of Irvine, Blair met Cherie Booth, whom he married in 1980.
Back to the start
Tony Blair's Political Career
Practising as a barrister in Irvine's chambers after having been called to the Bar in 1976, Blair specialised in employment and industrial law. Here, he gained experience in cases involving the Labour Party and various unions. He joined the Labour Party in 1975 and was elected MP for Sedgefield, one of the safest Labour seats in the country in 1983. Blair supported "the longest suicide note in history" - the disastrous election manifesto (Shaw, 1994: p.113). He publicly stated his commitment to unilateral disarmament, full employment and withdrawal from the then EC (Sopel, 1995: p.69). Privately, however, Blair did not believe in the arguments of the extreme left. In a lecture in Australia in 1982, he set out the need for a change of direction within the Labour Party, advocating a more centrist approach in order to appeal to a broader part of the electorate (Mandelson and Liddle, 1996: p.34).
Among the very limited intake of new Labour MPs in 1983, Blair found in Gordon Brown someone who shared his belief that the Party needed to be reformed. As was the case with Irvine, Brown would become a mentor to Blair due to his political experience. The then leader of the Labour Party, Neil Kinnock, commenced the process of improving the Party's electability and soon promoted Blair to the Front Bench. The speed of Blair's career may reflect his perfect timing. He did not share the battle scars of those MPs who had survived the internal rifts in Labour after the 1979 defeat. Labour was changing and needed fresh people.
Blair's experience with trade and industry law as a barrister was helpful when he joined a committee reviewing the trade union legislation that had been proposed and was being enforced at the time by the Conservatives. After the 1987 General Election, Blair came just short of winning a Shadow Cabinet post but was appointed deputy for the shadow Trade and Industry Secretary. In this function, he was responsible for the Party's relations with the City, and this provided him with useful contacts for his later leadership of the Labour Party. As shadow Employment Secretary from 1989-92, Blair got his first chance to implement his ideas for reform. He managed to persuade the unions to abandon the closed shop policy.(1) This was important to Labour's pledge to support the implementation of the Social Charter(2) in Britain.
When John Smith succeeded Neil Kinnock as leader, the Party's modernisation process slowed down somewhat. Smith focused on internal party reform and succeeded in unifying the factions of the Labour Party. The issue given most prominence under Smith was his successful bid to introduce a one member, one vote (OMOV) model for leadership elections along with other reforms of the internal voting systems. OMOV was a sensitive issue for the Labour Party and one that prompted fierce reactions from the unions in particular.(3) Tony Blair took part in the Union Links Review Group that dealt with the leadership election system among other things (Rentoul, 1996: p.319). He insisted on the necessity for OMOV decisions on policy issues, leadership elections and candidate selections. His suggestions found little support in the Group and a compromise had to be reached. A system called Levy Plus was introduced for the selection of parliamentary candidates(4) and the electoral college applied in leadership elections was changed along with insignificant moderations of the unions' block votes (Rentoul, 1996: p.330). Blair influenced the final outcome, however, by refusing to accept any compromises until it was as close to his wishes as possible. The voting system in leadership elections is not a pure form of OMOV. The votes in the electoral college are weighted with one third to each of the following bodies: the Parliamentary Labour Party (MPs and MEPs), affiliated organisations (individual union members), and individual Labour Party members (Fisher, 1996: p.71).
Unions retain much power in the Labour Party though they have accepted a small reduction of their say at conference. After the 1992 general election, more Labour MPs than ever were sponsored by unions(5) (Fisher, 1996:p. 76). Also, the unions continue to dominate the National Executive Committee (NEC) which is the highest authority in Labour with the exception of the annual conference.
Having held various posts in the shadow Cabinet, Tony Blair has not only gained valuable experience but has also been able to play a significant part in reforming the Party. He emphasises his achievements in connection with reversing the stance on the closed shop, focusing on law and order, reviewing the relationship with the unions and reforming the selection of candidates (block votes and OMOV) (BBC, 1997).
Back to the start
Policy Changes under Tony Blair
In order to assess the role of Tony Blair in reforming the Labour Party, the extent of the changes must first be established. In the following, the new in New Labour in terms of the policies that have been set out will be identified. The revision of Clause IV of the Party's constitution and Tony Blair's Stakeholder Idea will be discussed in individual sections.
New Labour is partly the result of the changes to the Labour Party proposed in the series of documents that made up the Policy Review. The aim of the Review was to prepare the Party for the cultural, economic and social environment of the 1990s in the light of the 1983 and 1987 election results (Shaw, 1994: p.84). In fact, Kinnock had initiated some changes in his first four years as leader but the Policy Review put the Party leadership in a better position to deal with the perceived electoral liabilities that led to the defeats. The main changes proposed concerned the economic policies. The commitment to nationalisation was substituted by the concept of "social ownership" and the Party sought to rid itself of its "tax and spend" image (Shaw, 1994: p.47). Arguably, the Policy Review did not succeed in the latter. One of the primary reasons for the defeat in the 1992 General Election was the distrust on the part of the electorate in the Party's approach to taxation and spending.
Entitled "It's time to get Britain working again," Labour's 1992 election manifesto attacks the Conservative Government's economic policy. Labour tries to appeal to the business community by promising "strong and continued emphasis on investment for economic strength [with] fair taxation and incentives for enterprise" (p.8). Contrary to the controversial commitment to unilateral disarmament upheld until 1987, the 1992 manifesto promises to "retain Britain's nuclear capability (p. 26). Furthermore, an active part is envisaged for Britain in Europe.
In Labour's policy guide "new Labour new Britain" (1996), the modifications of the policies in the above areas are further amended. "Britain will play a positive and leading role in the European Union" (p.15). A "sustainable investment-led growth" is promised (p.16). Also, support is given for a strong defence.
With the advent of Tony Blair, Labour's approach to the economy has taken the form of a stakeholder economy. This idea provides "the economic justification of social cohesion" (Blair, 1996a) in the form of mutual obligations between businesses and their employees. Stakeholding may point to a trend in New Labour to approach the American concept of workfare; connecting duties to the rights enjoyed under the welfare system. The Stakeholder Society might prove Tony Blair's most conspicuous amendment to the ongoing reform of the Labour Party. The implications of this "Big Idea" will be discussed later.
The attitude to Europe has changed slightly in accordance with the growing Euro-scepticism in Britain. Labour's draft manifesto "new Labour new life for Britain" (October 1996) adopts the Conservative "wait-and-see" stance on the single currency. This is hardly a fundamental change of policy but rather an attempt to appeal to the broadest part of the electorate possible. It is also a reflection of the views of Robin Cook and John Prescott.
The 1992 manifesto promised reform of the House of Lords and the establishment of a Scottish Parliament and a Welsh Assembly. The manifesto also encouraged debate on the electoral system. John Smith promised a referendum on the issue of electoral reform, confirmed by Blair when he became leader (Blair, 1996c). However, the Labour Party is divided on this issue. Proportional Representation (PR) has probably seemed less intriguing for the Party the greater its chances of getting into power had become.(6) Blair is "unpersuaded that proportional representation would be beneficial [...]" (Blair, 1996c). Less radical alternatives to direct PR have been proposed.(7) Where the 1992 manifesto was open to the question of reform of the electoral system, the 1996 draft manifesto and the 1997 election manifesto do not mention a review of the electoral system.
Labour has lately modified some of its proposals for constitutional reform, ruling out reform of the House of Lords in the first year of a Labour government (Leathley, 1997).(8) In the run-up to the general election Tony Blair created some confusion about the powers of a Scottish Parliament. However, the Scots did not unequivocally punish Labour for this electorally, though the SNP may have benefited from the lack of clarity in Labour's attitude.
In Labour's 1992 election manifesto, education is given a high priority. At the 1996 Labour Conference, Blair placed education at the top of the ten pledges in his American-style "covenant with the people." In the 1997 election manifesto, this is repeated. The emphasis on training is clearer than in 1992 but this area is also a follow-up on the changes initiated by the Policy Review (Taylor, 1997: p.154).
Blair has contributed to the Labour Party the focus on law and order. In the function of shadow Home Secretary from 1992-94, he succeeded in almost taking over the Conservative's image as the party of law and order. This is one of the few changes that was not the result of development of proposals in the Policy Review. It appears to be rooted solely in the pragmatic side of Blair's moral vision.
Labour lost in 1992 because the electorate distrusted its economic policies. Since then, the Party's goal has been to eliminate unfunded spending commitments and shed the tax and spend image. Labour's only contemplated tax increase at present is the windfall levy on the privatised utilities. This tax is to fund Labour's "welfare-to-work" programme according to its 1997 election manifesto.
Whether this is feasible is a highly debatable point; not least because Labour fails to outline the form and level of the tax. Will all privatised utility shareholders be affected by the levy?
In addition, the manifesto promises to improve the NHS and raise spending on health in real terms. The means for achieving this is solely the reduction of red tape within the NHS. Valid questions may be raised over Labour's present spending commitments but suffice it to notice that there is a significant change from the traditional socialist tax and spend attitude of the 1980s. New Labour defined itself very clearly as far as spending is concerned when Gordon Brown in January 1997 announced that Labour would adopt the Conservative Government's spending budget for the first two years of a Labour government. At the same time, the 1992 pledge to raise the top rate of tax from 40 to 50 per cent was dropped. New Labour is thus more radical than before on tax and spending. The 1997 manifesto promises that Labour will examine the use of "existing resources." What the manifesto does not say is that Labour is not averse to sell off these resources if need be. Privatisations will finance the spending on education and on reducing youth unemployment (BBC, 1997).
The minimum wage is a controversial issue as it was in 1992. The 1997 election manifesto adopts a somewhat noncommittal attitude by not stating a fixed amount but advocating a "[...] sensibly set national minimum wage." The reason for this difference from 1992 (fixed minimum wage at o3.40) is again to be found in New Labour's cautious handling of possible spending commitments.
Most policy changes under Blair discussed in this section represent further developments of the Policy Review and the policies under Smith. However, some of these developments are radical (restrictions on spending), and new policies have been identified. The latter include workfare and the concept of a stakeholder economy. Therefore, the next sections will examine the changes facilitating stakeholding and how New Labour intends to implement it.
Back to the start
The Revision of Clause IV
"New Labour is very much what I believe in. It's very much my own creation."
"[...] I was the person, probably above anybody else who argued the case for modernising the Labour Party [...]" (Tony Blair, in BBC, 1996)
With statements like these, Tony Blair emphasises his role in creating New Labour. As discussed earlier, he succeeded in persuading the unions to reverse the closed shop policy, and he attempted to extend the democracy within the Labour Party. This happened before he became leader. Shortly upon being elected leader, he took on another internal party reform: rewriting Clause IV of the Party's constitution.(9) Printed on the back of membership cards, the commitment in Clause IV (part 4) to nationalisation remained to many members the credo of the Party. However, it may be argued that the commitment was hollow as the privatisations which had taken place since Labour last formed the government had turned the issue into one of renationalisation. This will, in most cases, not be possible, as the proceeds from the privatisations are already spent. Furthermore, it seems that the commitment to public ownership was long reduced to a relic of the past. "New Hope for Britain," Labour's radical 1983 Manifesto, mentioned public ownership in only one sentence (Shaw, 1994: p.14).
Thus it is fair to say that what Tony Blair undertook when he decided to change Clause IV was not a radical revision of Labour policy. It was rather an attempt to update the constitution of the Party in order for it to conform to Labour's actual policies. The rewording of Clause IV gave rise to heated debate(10) and was eventually seen as a personal victory for Tony Blair, demonstrating the Party's trust in him. However, the changes that had already taken place in effect eliminated the relevance of the old Clause IV.
One reason for the resistance against changing Clause IV is to be found in the fear on the part of the traditionalists(11) that traditional Labour voters might become disillusioned with the Party. Also, there was an emotional commitment to the "credo" of the Party. But it might equally be argued that the revision met with such fierce resistance because the reform had already been carried out in a piecemeal manner by the modernisers. The reform of the Party has been slow in order not to attract the attention of the traditionalist wing or at least to avoid offending it. Of course, the traditionalists have had some say in the reform process but it seems they were taken by surprise by the proposal to rewrite Clause IV.
When Tony Blair claims that "our constitution has been rewritten," (Blair, 1996: p.4) it thus to a certain extent means "adapted to our policies." Seen in that context, one aim of rewriting Clause IV must have been to convey to the public (via the media) the image of a changed Labour Party. The smallest change may have been the one of the Party's constitution. But the revision served to highlight the reforms - and promote Tony Blair (Taylor, 1997: p. 190f).
However, there was more to the new Clause IV than an update. Blair has been attacked for using the debate over Clause IV to buy time in which to ponder possible policies for New Labour (Rentoul, 1996: p.408). But this argument fails to take into account the effect of the new statement of goals. The revision of Clause IV served at least three purposes. First, it adapted the Party's constitution to Labour's actual policies, thus also depriving the Conservatives of a prime target for attacks.(12) Second, a framework for future policy-making was given. The third and equally important purpose of the new Clause was to promote New Labour to the electorate.
Rewriting Labour's constitution was in itself a serious undertaking, but Tony Blair could have chosen to focus on other changes of the Party. He has not followed up on his commitment to have OMOV on policy issues or to do away with or even reduce the unions' block vote, for example. Blair may hesitate here because of the difficulties the modernisers experienced in making the 1993 changes. Of course, another plausible reason for his passivity in this area is that contemplating further reform of Labour's constitution would have distracted the attention from the goal of winning the next election.
The new Clause IV replaced more than the dogmatic goal of "common ownership of the means of production" in part 4 (see e.g., Rentoul, 1996: p.485-489 for the new and old clauses). It contains new priorities for Labour. Commitments to defence, a dynamic economy subject to competition, and co-operation in European institutions arose out of the Policy Review and under Smith's leadership. New to the constitution is the pledge to create opportunity for "the many not the few." The Conservatives' one nation language is thus applied to Labour's constitution. Furthermore, the 1995 version of Clause IV demands that the rights of the individual in society be conditional on the duties owed. This approach, which is central to New Labour's ideology, will be discussed in the following section on Tony Blair's Stakeholder Idea.
Back to the start
Stakeholding
In the preceding sections, the most important changes in the Labour's policies under the leadership of Tony Blair were identified. These changes were viewed in the context of the reform process of the Party and it was found that Blair continued and perhaps even accelerated the reform while adding little new. This section will offer an analysis of the concept of stakeholding which appears to be Blair's most important contribution to the new in New Labour.(13)
Tony Blair's idea has added a moral dimension and pragmatism (though sometimes hidden in lofty rhetoric) to the Party. In many ways, it can be argued that stakeholding is the vehicle for applying the new Clause IV to the realities of the world. New Labour is developing the "values" of Clause IV here, with Tony Blair presenting his vision for Britain.
Tony Blair chose to introduce the Stakeholder Society concept in Singapore in January 1996. While the Singaporean business community were somewhat indifferent to the opposition leader's vision for his country, the place chosen served the twin purpose of communicating the new "Big Idea" under intense media focus and portraying Blair as the statesman on a foreign visit to a country with a developing economy. This must be the result of careful deliberation on the part of the Labour leadership. The Stakeholder idea triggered an immediate debate over - what was really said. Some senior Labour MPs went against their leader and expressed concern that Blair avoided making actual policy statements.(14) Blair's speech was certainly not addressed to the traditional working class Labour voter with its posh tone and almost philosophical reasoning. The Conservatives claimed that the idea fundamentally reflected their ideology. However, there is a difference between providing shares in privatised companies and stakes in society. On the other hand, envisaging an "enabling" role for Government in its relationship with business could be mistaken for a Conservative policy. So could the one nation terminology of working in the interests of the many, not the few. The left-wing press welcomed the idea which could prove the vision which Labour lacked in order to distinguish itself in a positive manner from the Tories.
Rather than setting out detailed policies, stakeholding provides a framework for new policies to be developed in. It may be argued that it was merely a tactical move to avoid making possibly damaging policy commitments before the election. A more positive interpretation would be that the framework approach to policy-making is the right one for New Labour. It emphatically stresses the distancing from old-style socialism and outlines Labour's new vision at the same time (possibly in a happy combination with the former argument).
The key themes of the Stakeholder Speech are equal opportunities for all citizens, reform of the welfare system, prioritising of training and co-operation between business and Government. This marks a departure from the Labour Party of the 1980s and provides the priorities for New Labour under a new leader.
In his speech, Blair emphasised that a strong economy rests on a society to which everybody contributes and where everybody is given the chance for doing so. If people have an equal chance of contributing, they will work for society to succeed economically and socially.
The provision of a stake in society for every citizen is an end that reflects traditional socialism. However, when redistribution of wealth is dismissed as the means for achieving it, the socialist ideology is replaced by "social-ism," as Blair puts it.
The most controversial issue in Blair's Stakeholder Idea lies in an "active conception of welfare" with the abolishment of universal benefits. This represents a clean break with the 1992 manifesto. Labour now imposes duties and conditions on the recipients of welfare. Labour, the creator and defender of the welfare system, is seeking to reform it. This complies with the promise set out in the 1996 policy guide "new Labour new Britain" that a "[...] priority will be creating pathways from welfare to work [...]" (p.32). Stakeholding not only creates the pathways. It makes sure they are used.
There is little doubt that Tony Blair is formulating an idea that is largely his own or at least one that is deeply influenced by his Christian Socialist beliefs. Stakeholding can be seen as an attempt to equip the Party with the purpose or aim that Kinnock lacked. The speech communicated to the electorate the message that Labour has a "Big Idea." Whether stakeholding will provide a sustainable framework for policy-making in Government is debatable. The most immediate implication of stakeholding is the rejection of former ideology and the endorsement of pragmatism. "[...] we have liberated [our] values from outdated dogma or doctrine [...]." "What counts is what works" (Labour, 1997). Stakeholding remains open to interpretation by the new Labour government.
In his introduction to "What needs to change," (Blair, 1996b) Blair elaborates on his vision for Britain. The "ideal" Labour Governments of 1945 and 1964(15) are emphasised for establishing the values that the present Labour Party pursues. The Stakeholder Society is to be the modern vehicle for achieving these values. As the most substantial in a document containing no detailed polices, New Labour's intention to reform of the welfare system is again stressed. The new line of New Labour is set out with a further endorsement of "workfare" and a recognition of the existence of private pensions. This is not a set of policies, but New Labour's view of and acceptance of the modern British society. It is the ideological basis for a new generation in British politics.
Back to the start
Image and Unity under Tony Blair
The Labour Party has seen other changes under Tony Blair than those related to its ideology. A strict disciplinary code has been imposed on MPs and the role of spin doctors has grown. This is prompted by the Party's attempt to build up a new image of a young, dynamic and changed party. "Our constitution has been rewritten; [...] relations with the trade unions have been changed; [and] our democratic structures have been renewed" (Blair, 1996b: p.4). It is true that the new constitution adds substance to the claim that Labour has changed. However, the two other claims are overstating Labour's change in these areas. It was established earlier that the trade unions still enjoy much influence in the Party's governing bodies. Labour also claims that its relationship with the unions is based on "fairness, not favours." All this is somewhat contrasted by the promise by trade unions to "minimise strikes in order not to embarrass a future Blair government" (Sylvester, 1997). Arguably, the trade unions may have accepted to help Labour create the image of a changed relationship between the two in order to improve Labour's electability.
It is true that the democratic structures in Labour were reviewed but they were hardly renewed. As established above, the leadership election procedure did indeed become more democratic. The same applies to the selection of candidates in CLPs. Where formerly a committee selected the candidate, now all members are given a vote. This secures the support by the CLP of any candidates elected for Parliament and, in turn, his genuine interest in his constituency. But this hardly matters. If, for some reason, an unpopular candidate was selected to run for the seat, he would not win the seat anyway. In other democratic decisions in the Party, the block vote of the unions is still dominating.
Labour's image is not only determined by what it says. Equally important is who says it and what is done. A party leader's personal image carries great weight in any election campaign. When, last year, an opinion poll showed Blair's popularity with the female part of the electorate to be less than expected, immediate measures were taken.(16)
Appointed director of communications for Labour in 1985, Peter Mandelson has played a significant role in forming the Party's image through controlling (spin-doctoring) media relations (Rentoul, 1996: p.171). He has favoured the promotion of some party members (the "beautiful people") over others (Rosenbaum, 1997: p.109). This has made him increasingly unpopular within the Party. Clare Short has contributed to Tony Blair's "Stalin" image by publicly criticising Mandelson and the modernisers for censoring some party members and suppressing dissenting (traditionalist) views. Under Mandelson's instruction, Labour has adopted an American sound bite approach to media appearances. The interviewee focuses on one catch phrase and repeats it over and over again.(17)
Despite the caution, some issues have escaped the control of the spin doctors during Tony Blair's leadership. The closest Blair has come to be involved in a scandal was when the press found out that he and Harriet Harman sent their respective sons to opted-out schools.(18)
In order to actively secure the election of a larger proportion of women, Labour demanded all-women shortlists for the selection of candidates in half the vacant and marginal seats. However, New Labour suffered a defeat when an industrial court held that decision to be sexually discriminatory (Webster, Wilkinson, and Gibb, 1996). Furthermore, it may be argued that the Labour leadership's interference in the composition of the shortlists was in conflict with the principle of its OMOV selection procedure for parliamentary candidates. Allowing only women to stand was not only a blatant exercise in political correctness but also an attempt to position Blairite candidates for the election. New Labour's opponents see the incident as an example of calculating manipulation by the Party's image creators.
Tony Blair suffered some negative reactions when he recently stated that the beggars at King's Cross in London made people afraid of going there (McGrory, 1997). Such a statement hardly corresponds with his image as a Christian with social concerns.
Another image Labour has created is one of a united party. The possibility exists that the factions and differing views within the Labour Party have been silenced so much under Tony Blair that a counter-revolution from within the Party will arise some time during the life of the new Labour Government (Pilger, 1996). The factions in Labour may indeed have allowed a suppression of their views in recognition of the advantages of New Labour's electoral pragmatism. Some in the Party seem to have supported Tony Blair's electability project without fully appreciating his ideas. A bizarre example is the unconvincing attempt on the part of Tony Wright, author of "Why Vote Labour?" (1997) to set out Blair's vision. Comments on redistribution of wealth and "a modest increase in tax for those at the top end" (p. 36) reveal the author's difficulty in applying the language of New Labour.
When in opposition, Blair was obliged to compose his shadow Cabinet in concordance with the performance of the members in shadow Cabinet elections. Thus the composition of Tony Blair's shadow Cabinet reflected the support his reforms enjoyed as well as the opposition they met with in Labour. In office, he enjoys more freedom in distributing the ministries though he will want to satisfy as many wings of the Party as possible. Key positions in Blair's Shadow Cabinet were filled by modernisers, though. The now Home Secretary, Jack Straw, called for reform of Clause IV in 1993 (Jones, 1996: p.133). Gordon Brown, Blair's "Iron Chancellor," has been central to the formation of New Labour. Robin Cook, the Foreign Secretary did not always agree with Blair's visions but appears to be fully behind him now. The traditionalist John Prescott might have been seen as a balance to Blair's modernising views when elected Deputy Leader but has largely been supportive of Blair's modernisation.
The young and dynamic image Labour has created is embodied in Tony Blair. Shortly after he was elected leader and initiated the debate over Clause IV, Labour's membership figures soared. He is a popular leader and has in this respect contributed considerably to the present success of the Labour Party. His engaging rhetoric that sometimes has religous undertones makes him appear honest (in spite of the Tory "Phony Tony" sound bite) when adressing those issues he has close at heart. He is thus very convincing when he talks about morals, crime, and social justice. His is the image of the strong leader Britain had in his idol, Margaret Thatcher.
New Labour's allegedly improved internal democracy and renewed union relationship constitute an image that is not true of the actual situation. Still, in the light of Labour's latest electoral performance, the image projected by Mandelson and the other spin doctors from behind the scenes must be said to have been effective. Internally in the Party, the tight control may have had the opposite effect, though, creating enemies of New Labour. The facade of unity put up by New Labour is not quite big enough to hide the diverse factions that were very active a few years ago. There is a latent risk that the factions in Labour will become an opposition to Tony Blair in office. This risk has not lessened with the large majority Labour enjoys in the House of Commons.
Back to the start
Conclusion
The Policy Review and the leaderships of Smith and Blair aimed to broaden Labour's electoral base by appealing to the middle classes. Consequently, the policies have moved to the right. The reform of the Party has been accelerated under New Labour. The strategy of Tony Blair has been to move away from any fixed ideology and adopt a moral and pragmatic framework in which to create policies. However, Blair's vision is still developing and is in its present form open to interpretation by the new Labour Government. This also means that New Labour has kept its options open as concerns the formulation of policies. An exception is on the issue of the economy where spending and borrowing restrictions exist. Labour has pledged to observe the former Government's spending targets. Privatisations are viewed as a possible means to achieve New Labour's goals of improving social justice and education.
The Party claims to have changed significantly in terms of internal democracy and its relations with the unions. This image has been shown not to correspond totally with reality. Unions continue to exercise a dominating influence over the NEC and at the annual conference. The imposition of all-women shortlists on CLPs indicates that power over the Party remains with the leadership. Labour went into the election campaign a seemingly united party but in office, old factions may be reinvigorated.
Tony Blair has contributed to the reform of the Labour Party since he was first elected into Parliament in 1983. His youth, ambition, determinedness and moral principles are among the values which he has transferred to his party. Rooted in his Christian Socialist beliefs, his stakeholder idea epitomises New Labour. The revision of Clause IV assured the ideological and popular backing for Blair's reforms in Labour. He built on the changes initiated by Neil Kinnock but also equipped his Party with a new ideological and pragmatic platform for Government. Tony Blair did not only secure the support of his Party but also the one of the nation by offering a compromise between the old Left and the New Right.
Stakeholding reflects an admirable desire to make society better. It is a project in the making and thus the more vulnerable to misrepresentation by dissenting factions in Labour. It is a project that set out Tony Blair's vision for Britain and improved Labour's electability in the process. Now, Britain has allowed Tony Blair to carry out his project.
Back to the start
Notes
Use the "Back" button on your browser to return to the text.
1 "Closed shop" is when employment at a given place of work is linked to union membership.
2 Now the Social Chapter of the Maastricht treaty. Labour states unpaid parental leave and consultation of the workforce as the reasons for wanting to opt in.
3 Union leader Tom Sawyer summed up the attitude of the unions: "no say, no pay" (Sopel, 1995: p. 135)
4 Levy Plus allows union members to become full members of the Labour Party by paying a levy of o3. This boosted the membership figures of Labour. Union members paying the political levy can vote in selections of parliamentary candidates in Constituency Labour Parties (CLPs).
5 Trade unions traditionally awarded a compensation to MPs because of the low salaries paid. Now sponsorships are used for the campaigns (Peele, 1995: p.151)
6 PR would eliminate the present system in which relatively few parties are represented in the House of Commons. This might split up the Labour Party, inciting the different factions to set up their own parties.
7 One is the possibility for the voter to number candidates in order of preference! (Rentoul, 1996:p.477)
8 Labour and the Liberal Democrats have issued a document which sets out their shared belief that some constitutional issues should be reviewed.
9 Hugh Gaitskell, Labour's leader between the 1945 and 1964 governments, also tried to moderate its constitution in respect of the stated commitment to nationalisation. (Peele,1995:p. 195)
10 Party members got a chance to voice their opinion in a "consultation process" leading up to the special conference in April 1995 that ratified Clause IV in its new form. (Taylor, 1997: p.179)
11 Simplifying the diversity of the factions in Labour, it may be said that two major wings have been dominant under Blair; the traditionalists and the modernisers. The former believe in the virtues of "old" Labour and oppose the desire of the latter to renew Labour's ideology.
12 The Tories would point to the commitment to nationalisation as proof "old" Labour existed.
13 The Stakeholder Idea is not to be confused with the 1992 manifesto promise to promote "a stake for employees" by setting up a "democratic Employee Share Ownership Plan [...] or a co-operative." (p.14) An idea that seems to have been quickly forgotten. (Understandably, as co-operatives rather belong in the 1983 manifesto).
14 Ken Livingstone, in a comment: "It's warm words time again. I haven't a clue what it means. If anyone does could they let me know" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/stakeholder/quotes/quotes.html) (Of course, Livingstone is very left-wing and would be opposed to Blair's centrist ideas)
15 Respectively, Atlee and Wilson (elected on the theme of "New Britain"). The 1945 Government founded the British welfare state (notably the NHS) and the Wilson Government adapted the welfare state and the Labour Party to the needs of the time. Blair admires Wilson for being a moderniser (Blair, 1996b: p.10)
16 Blair started adressing more "feminine" issues. (Parker, 1996)
17 Examples include "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime," "fairness, not favours," and "we will work in the interest of the many, not the few."
18 Labour officially opposed the possibility introduced by the Conservatives for schools to opt out of local council control.
Back to the start
Bibliography
BBC "Panorama Leadership Special, April 7 - Tony Blair"
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/election97/background/parties/panblair.htm) 1997
Blair, Tony "The Stakeholder Speech" in Thomas, Richard "The Stakeholder Speech"
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/stakeholder/speech/sing1.html) 1996a
Blair, Tony "My vision for Britain" in Radice, Giles (ed) What Needs to Change
London: HarperCollinsPublishers, 1996b
Blair, Tony "Blair on the Constitution: Democracy's second age" The Economist, 14 September 1996c
Fisher, Justin British Political Parties Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall Europe, 1996
Heath, Anthony, Roger Jowell and John Curtice (eds) Labour's Last Chance? The 1992 Election and Beyond Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1994
Hitchens, Christopher "The Devil and Tony Blair" Vanity Fair, March 1995
Hughes, Collins and Patrick Wintour Labour Rebuilt: The New Model Party
London: Fourth Estate Ltd., 1990
Jones, Tudor Remaking the Labour Party: from Gaitskell to Blair London: Routledge, 1996
Labour Party, The Labour's Election Manifesto: It's Time to Get Britain Working Again London: The Labour Party, 1992
Labour Party, The new Labour new Britain: The Guide
London: Labour Party Publications, 1996a
Labour Party, The new Labour new life for Britain: Pocket Policy Guide
London: Labour Party Publications, 1996b
Labour Party, The new Labour new life for Britain London: Labour Party Publications, 1996c
Labour Party, The "new Labour because Britain deserves better" (http://www.labourwin97.org.uk/manifesto/britain/manifesto.txt) 1997
Leach, Robert British Political Ideologies 2nd edition,
Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall Europe, 1996
Leathley, Arthur "Father's stroke changed son's politics" The Times 2 October 1996
Leathley, Arthur "Straw to bide time on Lords reforms," The Times 2 January 1997
Mandelson, Peter and Roger Liddle The Blair Revolution: Can New Labour Deliver? London: Faber and Faber, 1996
McGrory, Daniel "Blair's a nice little earner for vagrants at King's Cross" The Times
8 January 1997
Parker, George "Blair woos women voters with new hairstyle" Financial Times,
6 November, 1996
Peele, Gillian Governing the UK 3rd edition, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1995
Pelling, Henry and J. Alastair Reed A Short History of the Labour Party 11th edition, Basingstoke: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1996
Pilger, John "Blair's brave new world" New Statesman & Society, 24 May 1996
Rentoul, John Tony Blair 2nd edition, London, Warner, 1996
Shaw, Eric The Labour Party since 1945 2nd edition, London: Blackwell Publishers, 1996
Shaw, Eric The Labour Party since 1945 1st edition, London: Routledge, 1994
Sopel, Jon Tony Blair: The Moderniser London: Michael Joseph, 1995
Sopel, Jon "Tony Blair" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/election97/background/parties/harpbla.htm) 1997
Sylvester, Rachel "Unions give Blair pledge on strikes" Electronic Telegraph 26 February 1997 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk)
Taylor, Gerald R. Labour's Renewal? The Policy Review and Beyond
Basingstoke: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1997
Webster, Philip, Paul Wilkinson and Frances Gibb " 'Women only' seats ruled illegal"
The Times, 9 January 1996
Wright, Tony Why Vote Labour London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1997