Saturday 9 October 2010

Labour, ever new

We are at a junction now where it is becoming ever clearer that Labour's New Generation is building upon the lessons learned by New Labour, it's concerns, and it's approaches. Indeed the overlap between New Labour and the New Generation seems to be being ever more openly cemented. In some ways it was inevitable. The results of the Leadership Contest were hardly a ringing endorsement of the views of those who wanted to break with New Labour and trash its record in government and the Coalition is stumbling over itself to appropriate New Labour's language and mine it's policy ideas. New Labour has shaped the political discourse in this country and is not so easily cast aside as declared dead. If we are to avoid being tarred as simply rebranding and, possibly even worse, simplistically rebranding, we need to make clear what this New Generation talk really means. If it is not to fall as flat as the Big Society, which everyone is talking about but no one thinks much of.

It has been made clear that the New Generation is not about age, though many of the younger members at all levels are tempted to put it in the context of the intergenerational phony war of current culture.

We have seen that it is not about involvement or otherwise with the past administration, the Shadow Cabinet and indeed the Leader make that abundantly clear.

Can I say what the New Generation refers to? No, and I am trying hard.

Personally I think we have enough to define ourselves against in the Coalition and it's policies without needing to define ourselves against our own stint in Government. The Leadership Contest is over now so lets focus on the business of winning the policy arguments and demonstrating to the voters that we are in this with them for them. The success's of New Labour should not be an anomaly in our parties history so lets forget about the big new things and be the right thing for the country.

1 comment:

  1. I'm not sure how helpful "defining against" is in any case.

    Part of the problem is that all we have to go on is people rather than policies. I think we went about it the wrong way - first work out what the job is, then look at hiring someone ;-)

    ReplyDelete