baldysblog.co.uk

For this article, I have used a picture of Ed Miliband apparently the “Bookies Favourite” to win the Labour Leadership election but in a sense, I could equally have used a picture of Simon Hughes, Deputy Leader of the LibDems because both are in a sense, actors on a stage awaiting the script and director to arrive.

They are both “all dressed up, with nowhere to go” and likely, both destined for oblivion as they await the “Coalition Experiment” to succeed or fail when both will inevitably, be struck down with“performance self doubts” and completely fluff their lines. But it never-the-less led me once again to consider the sheer folly of the Blair Brown fratricidal dispute whilst in Office, albeit with a slightly different perspective…

Labour Leadership Candidates

I have written before about the dreadful consequences of the Blair/Brown Feud over the Leadership and how that effectively ‘hollowed out’ the careers and development of a future generation of potential Labour Leaders but frankly it is a bit more than that. I caused some amusement on a comments section by describing the line up as being like the Fire Brigade in the children’s TV series “Trumpton”: Pugh,Pugh,Barney McGrew,Cuthbert,Dibble and Grubb.

Labour have a line up of possibly the most lack lustre contenders for the leadership in the whole of their history but there is something more, there are no ‘grey beards’ either. No seasoned former politicians around to gently nudge, guide and give a public face to the concept of a continuity of Labour ideas and political culture. And No, John Prescot hardly qualifies as that or indeed much else either !

Reactive Politics

One of the more noticeable traits with the Blair years was the constant knee jerk reaction to any news stories by Downing Street as if the Prime Minister and the Government were the centre of British Life and had to have a view on everything and everything that happened, totally bizarre ! In an age of “Celebrity”, Blair wanted to lead the show rather than just provide good administration and let the Country and its Citizens get on with their own lives. The Labour Government was rather like some demented “Stage Mother”, always interfering, never silent and in the end, regardless of the acting merits of the child, totally detested…

In a way, it was a logical consequence of a Labour Party that found itself totally unelectable during the 80s and for half the 90′s, ditching all the “Inconvenient Socialist Shit” in order to be elected and then finding that they had lost their very soul in the process so all was left was a political party stripped of any philosophical conviction therefore condemned to a world of celebrity and events generated by others.

Clearly a Lucky Man…

The really interesting thing is to compare ‘then’ with the position David Cameron is in today which can only be described as “very lucky” indeed for him and the Conservative Party, in fact it may also prove to be highly beneficial for British politics generally and the Labour Party in particular.

Imagine if Cameron had a majority Government and reasonably balanced state in the Public Finances, he would be under great pressure from both his MPs and the grass-roots to impose “Conservative Party Dogma” when it comes to policies. Even under the current fiscal restraints, Cameron with a majority Government would be constantly having to navigate conflicting pressures and desires emanating from his own Party in a sense reflecting the conflict within Labour on a “return to Socialist dogma” or a revived “New Labour”.

But fate has dealt kindly with Cameron because by having to form a coalition with the LibDems, at a stroke he has kicked the more rabid demands from his own Party into the long grass and will only have to deal with them again if, the coalition falls apart or the economy gets dramatically worse and even in the latter case, the circumstances will have a major influence on public opinion. If it is was obviously global trade related rather than due to a mistake in Government policy, he and the coalition would survive.

The bottom line though is fairly simple because although there will be ‘major grumbles’ Cameron will be able to pursue sensible policies without too obviously ‘sacrificing’ the Tory principles and aspirations on which he relies for support so that come the next election, the Conservative Party can move forward intact on a pure “Tory Platform”.

Banjaxed

In comparison, whatever happens, the next Labour Leader has a very difficult if not impossible task. Labour support in its heartlands stood up very well at the last General Election considering how noticeably poor a Government they had become under Gordon Brown. That might lead one to suspect that this support is founded on a desire for a return to socialist redistributive taxation and policies which were the same policies rejected by the majority of the English electorate 20 years ago. But whilst that will shore up the current support base, it will not without the “aspirational middle class” English voters, deliver a Labour majority in Parliament.

A far more difficult ‘sell’ to the Labour support base is a revised and updated “New Labour” approach and yet without it it and especially under the current need to substantially cut spending, Labour will not be credible to the majority in England.

The joke at Westminster before the General Election by all sides was that it “…would be a good one to lose…” I suspect that the same applies to the contest for the Labour Leadership. In ten years time, a better and likely and as yet unknown candidate will emerge to provide the impetus for a challenge to form a government, whoever wins today is on a hiding to nothing, it is a decidedly poisoned chalice.