|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Britain
Growing disaffection with Blair government in Britain
By Julie Hyland
5 July 2000
Use
this version to print
British Prime Minister Tony Blair is coming under attack, even
from those he once numbered amongst his closest friends. On Sunday,
millionaire author and Labour Party backer Ken Follett wrote a
savage attack on Blair in the Observer newspaper. Follett
and his wife Barbara, a Labour MP, are credited with aiding the
Labour Party's transformation into the preferred party of big
business.
In his article Follett said that Blair would be remembered
as the prime minister who had made malicious gossip an everyday
tool of modern British government. The prime minister functions
as a lawyer, and is incapable of making a decision that is not
based on expediency, Follett continued. He seems not to
possess the inner core of strong convictions that would enable
him to make a confident choice in a morally complex issue.
He called Blair's press advisers the rent boys of politics
for their spreading of black propaganda about those ministers
they want sidelined for one or another reason. This is now so
commonplace that it is no wonder the public is becoming
sceptical about the Government as a whole, Follett writes.
This fallout is symptomatic of more fundamental problems facing
the government. There is growing concern in Labour's highest echelons
that Blair is too mesmerised by his own publicity machine to see
that his government is in deep trouble.
Labour's electoral support in its traditional heartlands is
collapsing. According to an opinion poll conducted by MORI for
the Times newspaper last week, the majority of respondents
believe that Britain is as class-ridden as ever. More revealing,
a quarter of all those interviewed said that the class divide
had widened under Labour, rising to a third of working class people
questioned.
The poll also revealed that Prime Minister Tony Blair's personal
rating is now at its lowest point in his six years as leader of
the Labour Party, whilst more than three-fifths of the public
are dissatisfied with Labour's performance in government.
In May, former Labour MP Ken Livingstone won election as London's
new mayor on an independent platform, despite personal appeals
by Blair that voters should reject his candidacy. Last month,
Blair was booed and jeered by the normally sedate audience at
the annual Women's Institute conference, for a speech that had
been aimed at consolidating Labour's flagging political support
in middle England.
A series of recent by-elections has seen the Labour vote fall
drastically in urban working class neighbourhoods such as Leeds
and Tottenham. Only a few months ago, the Blair government had
felt confident that its huge 179-seat parliamentary majority,
and the continued isolation of the Conservative opposition, would
comfortably ensure it at least two parliamentary terms in office.
Now there are real fears in government circles that it could lose
the next general election, expected next year.
These concerns are not prompted by any increase in support
for the official opposition parties. The Times MORI poll
revealed that neither the Conservative Party nor the Liberal Democrats
have benefited from Labour's declining fortunes. Political commentators
generally agree that the only thing Blair has going for him is
that he is not Conservative leader William Hague or Liberal Democrat
head Charles Kennedy.
Labour has reacted to these indices of growing disaffection
with panic. Blair has ordered that more care be taken in spelling
out government policy and his leading public relations advisers
have been taken off day-to-day affairs to work out a "long-term
strategy" to rebuild Labour's electoral base.
But no amount of carefully "spun" press coverage
can hide from working people the reality of their daily liveslayoffs,
health and welfare programmes gutted, rising prices and job insecurity.
Even the government-friendly Family Policy Studies Centre has
reported that under Labour "the gap between rich and poor
has not narrowed", and was forced to criticise Labour's policies
on welfare reform for trapping many in poverty. Similarly, the
United Nations Children's Fund, UNICEF, reported that it had ranked
the UK twentieth out of 23 countries in its index of relative
povertyclassed as families with an income less than half
the national average. Only Russia and the US in the industrialised
world have higher rates of child poverty, UNICEF stated. It also
pointed out that the "current government had not narrowed
the gap between rich and poor," and warned that "cuts
in lone parent benefit and other changes will mean that one in
six children in the poorest tenth of the population will see their
household incomes fall."
When Blair took office in 1997, he claimed that his New Labour
Party would create a new type of British politicsthe so-called
"third way". Its remit was never specifically spelt
out, nor could it be. For whilst Blair used the slogan to try
and put some distance between his government and previous Conservative
administrations, its real purpose was to make clear to big business
that Labour had abandoned its old reformist programme and any
connection with the working class. Labour would continue to deepen
the offensive against social services, welfare provisions and
wages begun by its predecessors, Blair pledged.
Political commentators were greatly enthused by this approach.
They hailed Blair as a "genius," because his "third
way" apparently had something in it for everyone. He had
shown that big business policies could be reconciled with social
justice; at last British politics would no longer be riven by
class divisions, they proclaimed.
The emptiness of this rhetoric is now self-evident. Despite
the appearance of mass support its massive parliamentary majority
lends, the government lacks any firm social base. Not only has
its right-wing programme alienated many of its traditional supporters,
it is no longer seen as a means through which working people could
influence politics. Meanwhile, the middle ground to
which Blair had sought to orientate has itself divided between
a tiny privileged elite and the vast majorityteachers, public
sector employees and skilled workerswho share the same problems
and concerns as millions of other working people and their families.
A terrible realisation is dawning within New Labour. Blair's
supposed assethis complete disregard for the working classis
actually his government's Achilles' heel. Earlier this year, Labour
MP Peter Kilfoyle resigned from the government in what he said
was a protest at its disregard for its working class heartlands.
Now another MP, Andrew MacKinlay, has announced that he will stand
against Blair loyalist Clive Soley in November as chairman of
the Parliamentary Labour Party. The virtually unknown backbench
MP announced his candidacy by accusing ministers of being "arrogant"
and "out of touch" with ordinary voters. One supporter
said that MacKinlay was "not running against Clive Soley;
he is running against Tony Blair". Subsequently, former Labour
minister Mark Fisher has sent a letter to local party members
in which he attacked the government for surrounding itself with
"glitzy people" whilst being "ignorant of people
on low incomes".
There are a great many Labour MP's who stand to lose their
previously safe seats if working class voters continue to abstain.
Despite the huffing and puffing, there is little that such complaints
can achieve. At best, all they amount to is a call for Blair to
better disguise the anti-working class character of his government's
policies. But working people have proven to be far more astute
than they were given credit by government and the media. What
has been described as Blair's extended "headache" period
is in reality only the first rumblings of social and political
discontent boiling up beneath the surface. This might well prove
to be one genie that will not go back in the bottle.
See Also:
Britain:
Labour in Government
[WSWS Full Coverage]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |