12 years ago today Tony Blair wrestled power from the Tory party in an unprecedented electoral landslide that left the defeated party in disarray for the best part of a decade, promised change and a fresh start for everyone in the country. Somewhere along the line, it all went wrong, and I've been wondering why?Labour have been in power for nearly half of my life, but given the way the polls are looking and Gordon Brown's sorry attempts at governing, it looks like 2009 could be the beginning of the end for the current Labour administration. If I'm honest I'm not sorry about that either. My politics is naturally left leaning, and in that sense Labour should be my first choice party, but it isn't. More than anything they just leave me feeling let down, let down by 12 years of false dawns, failed new deals and empty promises.
It all could have been so different. I'll happily admit that I was too young to vote in 1997 (by 4 years), but that doesn't mean I wasn't excited by the potential of New Labour and Tony Blair. I knew I wasn't a Tory, and I knew I found John Major dull, uncharismatic, bereft of ideas and out of touch. The promise of 'things can only get better' combined with the euphoria of that day was intoxicating- we really felt things were going to change for the better. Tony was a bewitching character, a politician the like of which I'd never seen, and an engaging personality (something I found to be true when I heard him debate in the flesh at Oasis HQ in the last general election). After all Labour had a huge majority, they could do what they liked and they were promising so much- a new kind of politics (sound familiar David Cameron fans?)- and yet they fell so far short.
There are various themes that arise from the reign of New Labour that I find symptomatic of the disappointment I feel in them, and the way they failed to capitalize on the opportunity they had;
Style over substance has to be the first one. Instead of transforming the NHS, education and social welfare they threw money at everything, installed layers and layers of bureaucracy and squandered the opportunity of a generation. Yes, things have changed on the surface, but at their core have they improved? I'm not sure they have. Take education for example. Literacy levels are up, schools have higher funding and more pupils stay on post-16 than when Blair came to power. However whether the education system has improved qualitatively I think is a different question. From what I saw on my PGCE and when I visit schools in my current post I'm inclined to think it hasn't. Teachers work their fingers to the bone, but are weighed down by paperwork, unnecessary assessment and constant red tape. The freedom of the individual teacher to express their skills and abilities in the best way for each individual class has been suppressed by the constant demand to teach to test. To quote David Cameron (who I think was quoting someone else) "constantly weighing the pig doesn't make it any heavier" It's like the government wants to micro manage every element of the services it provides, giving no freedom at all to professionals who just want to get on with their jobs,and that is to the detriment of each of those professions and the people they serve.
Secondly there was the 'special relationship' between Tony Blair and George Bush, that so perfectly illustrates how the lust for power and influence overpowered common sense and just doing the right thing in number 10. With his Stateside ally Tony saw the chance to punch above his weight as a statesman and influence global politics in a way he otherwise couldn't. The longer he stayed in number 10 the longer these characteristics came to the fore as he strove for his'legacy' to write his name in the history books, regardless of what that cost in terms of Britian's global standing and integrety. By being the lap dog of one of the most hoplessly inept Presidents in history, Tony Blair condemned this country to an illegal war, decimating our human rights record by taking part in torturous 'extraordinary rendition' and of course causing the relentless humiliation we are subjected to in Eurovision every year!
Worst of all is the way it feels like New Labour abused the trust of the British public (and me!). To start with there was Alistair Campbell and the spin machine, the introduction of top-up fees, then the WMD's and the invasion of Iraq, the David Kelly affair, the handling of the economy, the erosion of our civil liberties under the anti-terror banner and the countless personal misdemeanours of politicians who came to power partly on an anti-sleaze ticket. That's just the headline errors for me, on a deeper level New Labour have further eroded the reputation of British politicians to the point where it can really go no lower and is second only to that of bankers. The sad thing is both Blair and Brown seem so self righteous I'm not convinced either of them would see this.
That's not to say it was all bad, the minimum wage was a positive move forward, the economy was booming for a while (although we now see how shaky the foundations of this were) and the Good Friday peace accord in Northern Ireland was an amazing achievement, to name some of the positives to come out of the past 12 years.
I realise that some of this will make me sound like a closest Conservative, but I'm not. I just think New Labour have taken the idea of 'big government' to a place where it becomes a hindrance, rather than a help, for society and have failed to live up to so many of their promises. I suppose its only natural a party that has been in power as long as Labour stagnates and I just hope they don't take as long to recover from the electoral beating that is sure to come their way as the Conservatives did from '97.
Posts
2 comments:
You're young and you won't yet quite realise what Labour had in Tony Blair.
He was a man who could reach across party lines. He still can, imho. If he were still PM I actually think Labour could win a fourth term.
The reason? He has vision AND leadership qualities in abundance. No other politicians IN THIS COUNTRY possesses both. Few possess even one of those attributes.
And another thing he has almost uniquely in today's politics is the ability to articulate. I watched him in the ommons at PMQs a few weeks before he left. He was in complete, calm command of that place, despite admitting it always terrified him. He treated others with great respect and answered every question fully and politely. He was clearly highly respected from all sides.
Cameron, granted, based on his hero Blair, has some of the communication skills. Though those would be shown for what they are - lacking in substance - were he articulating against Blair and not Brown.
Blair was right too about Iraq.
Please do not swallow whole the Left's story about him being a Bush lackey. Nothing could be further from the truth.
In 1999, before Bush became president, Blair gave his International Doctrine speech in Chicago. It cited intervention as of high importance when necessary in this globalised world of dictators and harbourers of terrorism.
We was right then and he was right last month in Chicago when he brought the doctrine up-to-date.
I'd take a bet that you won't see many - any - politicians with Blair's vision and understanding of the big political picture in your lifetime.
All political careers end in tears, even great ones like his.
But I am grateful for what he did for this country. And although not a Labour member or supporter, I am filled with admiration at how he saved the Labour party from near-certain demise.
Now we have Brown.
Need I say any more?
http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2009/04/30/iraqs-over-right-now-shall-we-hang-blair-or-burn-him-at-the-stake/
Hey Blair supporter! Thanks for taking the time to reply!.
I don't disagree he had leadership qualities and vision, and I said as much, I just dont think he fulfilled his potential, and in some cases just plain messed up. I also agree that he is a rare breed, that Cameron is essentially a 2nd rate copycat, and the less said about Gordon Brown the better.
I'm sure Iraq is better without Saddam, but the ends do not justify the means. There is no evidence for WMDs, it was just a lie, and taking a country to war on the basis of a lie is not good leadership. It isolated us diplomatically, didn't really help with the terrorist situation and has cost many, many lives. There must've been a better way of going about it...
I'm not sure he was fully respected on all sides either, most PMQs, especially in the later years didn't involve a lot of politeness.
I guess I'm just sad the New Labour project didn't live up to its promise. It's obviously much easier to say that in retrospect, but in the end that's how all governments get judged.
Post a Comment