A Left turn for Labour will do profound damage

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Telegraph View: Across Europe, the political consensus is moving to the Right

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop ... amage.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This has been another week that combined high drama and embarrassing farce. On Monday, it seemed that Labour MPs might be ready to hold the Prime Minister to account for his terrible misjudgments and demand a leadership election. Instead, they were bullied and flattered into allowing Gordon Brown to stay in office, presumably until a general election next year. And so ended the most comically botched coup in modern political history.

Then, yesterday, this newspaper revealed that Shahid Malik, the minister (very) rapidly reappointed to the Government after he was cleared of breaking ministerial rules over his rental arrangements, failed to disclose information about his use of Parliamentary expenses to the official inquiry led by Sir Philip Mawer. Incredibly, Mr Brown had initially refused to publish Sir Philip's findings. Is this what we can expect from his much-vaunted clean-up of government? The word "transparency" does not come to mind.

Other depressing and bizarre things happened during the week. On Wednesday, the Prime Minister stood at the Dispatch Box and boasted about increases in public spending ("investment") while attacking the Conservatives for proposing cuts. His approach was both disingenuous and myopic: disingenuous because Labour will be cutting budgets (although not nearly enough) and myopic because he fails to realise that the public is now in favour of reducing state expenditure.
No wonder Lord Carter, ennobled only last autumn in order to mastermind Britain's internet strategy, is leaving the Government in apparent exasperation. Hazel Blears, meanwhile, now regrets storming out of office, yesterday issuing an apology in a desperate attempt to avoid deselection.

The confusion of the past week was not the product of an unlucky chapter of accidents. This is the sort of chaos that occurs when a weak and angry Prime Minister manages – just – to fight off his opponents with threats, promises and concessions. Lord Mandelson, Mr Brown's former arch-critic, now controls a Government department so vast that few people can even remember its name. In the best joke of the week, William Hague said that "it would be no surprise to wake up one morning to find he'd become an archbishop". That was funny – but there is nothing amusing about the prospect of a whole year of Mr Brown's Cabinet colleagues demanding more power or resources as the price for shoring him up. And how many businessmen and television personalities will be parachuted into the Government via the House of Lords in order to make the Prime Minister feel more secure? At this rate, there will soon be a national shortage of ermine.

We have not changed our view that there should be a general election this year. But, given that Mr Brown seems determined to cling on until the last minute, can the British people expect anything useful from this dysfunctional administration? The answer is that we must demand that the Cabinet discharges its duties in the long-term interests of the nation – even if we are ignored. In which case, electoral retribution will be savage.

There are clever and thoughtful politicians in the Government and on the Labour backbenches. Even if they missed their opportunity to remove Mr Brown, they must show the courage to resist the high-spending, old Left agenda that Labour ideologues and trade unionists are pushing on a vulnerable PM. They must also drum home the message that this is no time for constitutional tinkering or expensive, counter-productive ID card schemes. Even if voters wanted these things – and most do not – this Government simply lacks the moral authority to impose them.

It is no exaggeration to say that dozens of Labour MPs see no alternative to the frugal, modest model of government that the Conservatives are beginning to embrace, and not before time. These Labour modernisers understand that "investment" is shorthand for buying public sector votes at the next election, and this makes them uncomfortable, not least because it will not deliver victory. They have noticed that, across Europe, the political consensus is moving Right, not Left, in an era that was supposed to witness the humiliation of capitalism. They privately agree with their brave maverick colleague Frank Field that the financial crisis is an opportunity to create a better society founded on initiative, not dependence. Now they must say so publicly, or face a generation in opposition.

[left739]

While union leaders massively favour the Labour party because it is the next step on their career ladder - whether into parliament or by appointment to various cushy jobs in the state bureacracy - for the rest of us it will make little difference.

All the political parties accept the rules of the capitalist game. The money that has been borrowed to save the banking system has to be paid back so the government of whatever party will have to raise taxes and cut spending - most likely a mixture of both. Whatever government emerges from the next election will have an agenda of savage cuts in public spending, attacks on public sector pay and resolute support(e.g. through the anti-strike laws) for attacks on the pay and conditions of workers in the private sector. Thus whether RM ends up privatised or not we face the same pressure to slash costs i.e. attacking our terms and conditions to increase profits.

Against that our all we can do is resist the attacks as strongly as we can. The fight against these Labour appointed RM bosses will be followed by a fight against whatever bosses the next government imposes on us. As the cost of the crisis is felt across the board there is a chance there will be more and more struggles and that people might start to see beyond the pathetic choice of labour austerity or Tory austerity.

[Tall Guy]

Will be a very different position when Alan Johnson is likely to be the next leader of the Labour party, probably before the next election.

What then, as the PM being an ex-CWU leader?

[BELIAL]

Ah the telegraph view ,well known campaigners for workers rights

[left739]

Will be a very different position when Alan Johnson is likely to be the next leader of the Labour party, probably before the next election.

What then, as the PM being an ex-CWU leader?

As a government minister Alan Johnson has been a loyal New Labour apparatchik supporting and implementing numerous policies that worsen things for the working class. He has never tried to repeal the anti-strike laws that the business will happily use against us in the coming dispute. He has supported the moves to privatise RM.

His reign as CWU leader was before my time but I gather he was not at all popular with CWU activists and members. He was willing to totally cooperate with management in terms of the them pushing for teamwork and other 'flexible' practices even when union policy was against such changes. During the 1996 strike he constantly tried to push for acceptance of a settlement that neither the PEC nor the rank and file found acceptable. Presumably it is was the memory of what kind of trade unionist he had been and knowledge what kind of Labour government he has been an active part of, that led conference to overturn the leadership's wish to recommend a vote for him to be deputy labour party leader a couple of years ago. Hayes and co apparently got all upset about that.

If Johnson ever becomes prime minister we'd be crazy to expect anything different from him than what Labour have already been doing to us.