Livingstone calls on Labour to learn lessons from London

Free Radical Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:39:24 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

In a thoughtful article in today's Guardian (9 May), Ken Livingstone calls on Labour to learn the lessons from last week's elections in London.



To my mind, a key part of Ken Livingstone's article is the following passage:

"Following May 1 some people are posing the choice as between moving "to the left" or "to the right". This is not the right question. Labour must place itself at the centre of a progressive alliance that can solve the problems facing the country."

This view makes a lot of sense. Our task now is to reconstruct the progressive coalition that Livingstone managed in London so well.

Meanwhile, over at the Economist, Bagehot suggests that the current Conservative party is New Labour's final triumph - "Eleven years of New Labour has made compassion compulsory."

Perhaps there is a grain of truth in this, just as there was more than a grain of truth in the notion that New Labour represented the final triumph of Thatcherism. And in shifting leftward once might say that the Tories have displaced Labour from that centre-right ground.

But, note what Livingstone says - the choice is not simply about moving Labour to the Left or the Right, but about placing itself at the centre of a progressive alliance. So, do the terms 'left' and 'right' still have a validity? I think they do, but the Labour coalition must include people of the left and the centre of politics, otherwise it will not work. And we should be guided, as Livingstone suggests, by what needs to be done.

This is not necessarily about embracing neo-liberal orthodoxy. Livingstone's policies have always been, in many respects, identified with the left, but he has also embraced progress, environmental issues, and the kind of 21st century cosmopolitan culture that London reflects so well.

In addition, issues of liberty do not sit simply on a left-right axis. I believe that the Tories are very astute in capturing the mood of our times and (regardless of what their real agenda might be) trumpeting civil liberties. Labour has yet to learn that lesson, but there is still time. Let's start placing ourselves at the centre of that progressive alliance.


tags: , , , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Livingstone calls on Labour to learn lessons from London | 12 comments (12 topical)

Re: Livingstone (#1)

by e10rifles on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:23:09 PM GMT

Load of stuff and nonsense from Ken.

I agree completely with the analysis here: http://www.davidosler.com/2008/05/the_class_politics_of_ken_livi.html


Re: Livingstone (#2)

by swatantra on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:38:10 PM GMT

Good that Ken goes for 'centre' and 'progressive' politics. Because that is the only way for Labour. No lurch to the hard Left.


[ Parent ]

Re: Livingstone (#3)

by Free Radical on Fri May 09, 2008 at 05:13:32 PM GMT

E10 rifles - certainly a strident view from Dave Osler (and a highly amusing exchange with "Snowball" on your link, which illustrates the kind of idealogical cul-de-sac the left risks finding itself caught in - but even within this cul-de-sac one might argue that the Soviet state went badly wrong when factions were banned within the Communist Party of the Soviet Union...).

But the point is perhaps that Livingstone was very successful in London - he did not precipitate a revolution but he improved the lives of millions of people. It may not be as ambitious as some on the left might like, but it was something, and it worked. We will now see precisely what the difference is between a Labour and a Tory London Mayor...

And, personally, I am not arguing for abandoning the terms left and right, but for building our coalition (that the Labour party has always been).

To Swantantra - with respect, I think you miss the point of what Ken is saying - it is a call for a certain pragmatism and for Labour to put itself at the centre of a "progressive alliance" - this is of course a coalition that includes people that you might characterise as "hard left."


[ Parent ]

Re: Livingstone (#4)

by lastword on Fri May 09, 2008 at 06:50:53 PM GMT

"But the point is perhaps that Livingstone was very successful in London - he did not precipitate a revolution but he improved the lives of millions of people".

Completel agree. 


[ Parent ]

Re: Livingstone (#9)

by swatantra on Sat May 10, 2008 at 05:59:38 PM GMT

I think the Italian socialists called theirs the Olive Tree coalition, a rag bag of groups ranging from the Marxists and Trots on the one hand to the Social Democrats and Centrists on the other. The important point was that it was led by a Centrist, and above all, a pragmatic politician Prodi, fully aware of what can and what cannot be achieved. Its all very well having idealists on board but they often don't live in the real world and can't add up budgets.


[ Parent ]

Re: Livingstone calls on Labour (#5)

by Anonymous X on Fri May 09, 2008 at 07:43:17 PM GMT

Seems like Livingstone is advocating Labour working closer with other self-described "progressive" parties as an anti-Tory bloc (correct me if I'm wrong). Perhaps he sees the future of British politics as evolving in the direction of coalitions, like in the rest of Europe.


Re: Livingstone lessons from London (#6)

by Simon Morley on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:13:40 PM GMT

Ken's policy categories of investment (hard and soft), fairness (primarily through universal public services), and sustainability make a lot of sense for me. And real life  projects like the Olympics, congestion charge/bus investment and crossrail don't fit neatly into one category but overlap all the categories. This makes far more sense than John McDonnell's 'May manifesto' which while I don't have a problem with the individual elements in themselves, as a package make no sense. It could make sense to characterise national policies in that way, and while there is a lot of focus on public services and some on environment, there is not enough on investment, probably becuase it sounds like 'picking winners' in the sense of favouring particular businesses.

But investment in bio-science, engineering, manufactuing, culture and skills does not have to mean picking winners in that sense.  And we already have policies like wind and tidal power generation, clean coal, nuclear power, defence shipbuilding and aerospace that are all growing in importance, first for Britain but once we have proven technology and skills there will be big markets for overseas, because of government choices, and which we should probably be pushing more.


Re: Livingstone calls on Labour (#7)

by jkitleft on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:55:23 AM GMT

Another intelligant post, thankyou Free Radical.
No, people don't want a McDonnelite Labour party, but progressivism must mean commitment to ending proliferation, tackling global warming, secularism, tackleing inequality, redistibution of wealth, ending tyranny universally, workers' and consumers' rights etc.


Re: Livingstone calls on Labour (#8)

by Free Radical on Sat May 10, 2008 at 05:34:13 PM GMT

Thanks jkitleft. Actually I think there is little wrong with the policies the McDonnel advocates - they are really quite reasonable and in line with the other things you call for (and with which I broadly agree) - though it is true that McDonnell's presentation looks a bit dated. I think that the socialists around McDonnell have an important place in this alliance that, as Livingstone says, Labour needs to place itself at the heart of.

Some may interpret Livingstone's call as an abdication of what we think of as left policies (or indeed an abdication of politics), which it is not. Personally I remain a socialist but I am happy to work with those who are on the right of the Labour party in order to win power and carry out policies on which we can agree. In the same way I am happy to work with people not in the party on particular issues (e.g. ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan). And of course we need to appeal to millions of people who are not necessarily Labour supporters.


[ Parent ]

Re: Livingstone calls on Labour (#10)

by jkitleft on Sat May 10, 2008 at 08:10:18 PM GMT

Absolutely- may I add that I am thankful to debate someone who does not descend into stubborn orthodoxy. I believe we can appeal to progressive politics, while being electorally appealing. 1.4 million Agency Workers could be made better off. 700,000 illiegal immigrants. 400,000 pensioners, if we make care for the elederly as high as a prority as schools or hospitals. Already I have named progressive policies that could tap into constituencies of 2.5 million people. I am sure you can think of other examples.

I do not believe in Bennite orthodoxy for the party, nor Blairite orthodoxy for the party. We should be a broad coalition. Before the SDP split, we had around 6 factions. The 'Bennite' left, the still very left-wing supporters of Foot, the Soft-Left, the moderate right, the old right (I'm thinking of the potently eurosceptic section), and the SDP right. The Bennites, and New Labourites have tried to undermine this coalition at their particular points of power. We can win, with a progressive coalition of the Labour left, and right. Policies can appease both: The 'right-to-buy', but with capital raised being re-invested into social housing for instance.

NB: I hope you have seen my response about Iraq. I think we need to re-iterate our commitment to social democracy, but I agree that we should have an exit strategy.


[ Parent ]

Re: Livingstone calls on Labour (#11)

by Anonymous X on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:15:32 AM GMT

Couldn't have put it better.


[ Parent ]

Re: Livingstone calls on Labour to learn lessons (#12)

by Group51 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:39:03 AM GMT

I quite agree with the article and many of the responses, the government seems to have narrowed its corridor of choices to the centre-right.  We need to open this up to widen our support, and we need to see that the Tories have done just that.

Please lets not forget, however, that Livingstone's achievement in London was NOT carried out under a first past the post electoral system.


Livingstone calls on Labour to learn lessons from London | 12 comments (12 topical)