The vision thing
The Milburn-Clarke website has launched. And what's it all about? On the face of it, it's great news:
We believe in radical reform. For us reform is for a progressive purpose - to make for a fairer society. We look to policies that empower individual citizens, reward aspiration, spread opportunity, tackle intolerance and inequality, provide security, protect the environment and that are internationalist not isolationist. And we look to a style of politics that is based on dialogue, debate and devolved power. Wonderful! They can come and join the New Party! On second thoughts, perhaps that's not what they've got in mind. Guido Fawkes suggests it might not be:
It is yet another "participatory" website, policy orientated, debating the future direction of the Labour party, blah, blah, blah. Yawn.
Because we don't have many of them already do we? CompassOnline, ProgressOnline, LabourHome, LabourSpace and even PM.Gov.UK. None of the Lobby believed it, all the questions were about Gordon. All you need to know from the questions is this: despite being repeatedly asked in different ways, neither of them would endorse Brown for leader, or rule themselves out of running for leader.
Best contribution was from Austin Mitchell, he said websites were becoming "the new opium of the people". Mitchell went up in Guido's estimation for that, less than a dozen backbench MPs turned up and the media out-numbered them 5 to 1. This is all about stopping Gordon whatever Milburn and Clark say, Milburn was smirking throughout and his face said, you know I'm lying, I know I'm lying, but we have to pretend this is about policies not personalities. No policies were mentioned at all during the hour long press conference, no one even asked about policies. It used to be axiomatic in Labour Party politics that when somebody says "it's about policies, not personalities", you know perfectly well that it's about personalities. That was always the case when Tony Benn was saying it, and it's no different now.
Guido is right. The name of the game is: Stop Gordon at all costs. Daniel Finkelstein gets to the point of it all (again):
Traditionally renewal in political parties does take place behind closed doors. It results from a small group of people breaking away from the established view and providing the party with a new story.
Open, participatory debates with your own supporters has not proven a very fertile source of renewal in the past.
I rather like the idea of an open, loose political federation full of independent people and agree that such participation would produce better policies. But I rather doubt that's what Milburn and Clarke have in mind.
What they really mean is that they don't think much of the renewal Gordon Brown is planning. And they would prefer something else under someone else, although they are not quite sure what or who. There is indeed a note of desperation in the Milburn-Clarke initiative. Gordon Brown as Prime Minister would be Labour on auto-pilot, and as such would end up resembling Old Labour more closely than New Labour. The polls show that Gordon Brown would face a tough challenge at the next election from David Cameron, whereas a fresher face in the Labour leadership (David Miliband is the current dauphin of choice among the Blairites) might fare better.
Will any of this make any difference in the long run? Probably not. It's not about policies - it's about personalities.
|