Labour’s modernisers have to get beyond factionalism if they are to reclaim power | Spencer Livermore (original) (raw)

For all modernisers in the Labour party, Jeremy Corbyn’s victory should be a reason to show deep humility. We were comprehensively defeated by a hard left we thought had been decisively vanquished.

The roots of such a profound political reversal are far deeper and more fundamental than we have so far acknowledged. I don’t claim fully to understand them, but it is clear that our defeat is not merely the story of the hard left’s rise, but of New Labour’s decline. And in this regard we have no one but ourselves to blame. As someone who has played a senior role in New Labour over the past 18 years – serving as an adviser to Gordon Brown in the Treasury and then in Downing Street, and on election campaigns in government and in opposition – I accept my share of responsibility.

What is more difficult to accept, or indeed understand, is the scant effort made by the retreating forces of New Labour to learn the lessons from defeat so that we can begin to rebuild.

The absence of a proper reckoning after the 2010 defeat was a key reason Labour lost again five years later. Once more this summer, any prospect of the leadership election becoming a platform for serious self-examination was swept away in the mayhem that started as Jeremy Corbyn began dominating the contest.

The essential pre-condition for a successful analysis now is unity among Labour’s modernisers. The problem that bedevilled Labour in government is the same problem that still blights our understanding today: the historic and continuing fracturing of New Labour between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. As a result, we have seen little in the past few weeks other than factional scapegoating of individuals, when the truth is that all of us share responsibility for our defeat.

This factionalism already seems incredibly outdated, and by the next election will be ancient history. Given our much-diminished position within the party, we can no longer afford to indulge in the narcissism of small differences. Anyone who cares about us being a party of power, not merely protest, should get over this two-decade-old split once and for all. Indeed, debate would be vastly improved if the words “Blairite” and “Brownite” were never uttered again.

The focus now should be on the principles of modernisation, not on its personalities. I know that for some, the language of modernisation has no place in our party today. I think this is wrong.

From our 1945 manifesto – Let Us Face the Future – onwards, we have only ever succeeded when we have claimed the language of modernisation for ourselves.

To do so for a new generation, the right starting point is the principles underpinning the original modernisation project, begun by Neil Kinnock some 30 years ago. First, the moral force of our historic ideals needed to be made relevant for modern times, recognising that only the ends, not the means, were sacred. Second, it was our duty as the party of working people to be in touch with, and accurately to reflect, their priorities and aspirations. Third, if we were to be given the privilege of governing, it would be because we were trusted by the electorate, most crucially on the economy. Finally, a successful movement would be built as much from the grassroots as from Westminster.

We should always be proud of our record in government, but we must also be honest: over 13 years, we did not always live up to these principles. By the time we left office, the moral force of New Labour had been tarnished internationally by Iraq and domestically by the consequences of the global financial crisis. Far from being in touch with working people, we had descended into managerialism and technocracy, fatally amplified by the expenses crisis. Our hard-won reputation for economic competence had been ceded by misreading the public mood on the levels of public spending. And organisationally, the modernisers had become little more than a narrow sect, itself divided and insular.

To recover, we need to rediscover these original principles and renew the cause of modernisation.

Renewal means regaining the moral force of our politics and being clear about our values. This requires today’s equivalent of John Smith’s Commission on Social Justice to redefine how to combine economic dynamism with social justice in the years ahead.

It means understanding the forces shaping change in our country, with modern versions of voter consultation exercises such as Labour Listens in the 1980s and Southern Discomfort in the 1990s to ensure we are in touch with the needs of the people we seek to represent.

It means beginning the long journey back to economic credibility, by finding an answer to what Labour is for when there is little money to spend, and finding an act of moving on as symbolic as the rejection of the shadow budget after 1992, by more clearly recognising the mistakes of the past.

And renewal means rebuilding from within constituency parties, among registered and affiliated supporters, and rebuilding allies again within the trade union movement. We need a new organisation, equivalent to the Labour Co-ordinating Committee – the Kinnock-era constituency-based modernisers – to drive this process from the grassroots.

The road back to power is getting longer. The last few months have made it a more daunting journey than that undertaken even in 1983. But we have the benefit of knowing it has been completed once before. We must remember the principles that secured victory then, and learn from our mistakes since, so that we can renew once more rather than retreat.