There is never a year that a political party can afford to
waste – but 1993 is going to be particularly important for Labour. What the
party does in the next 12 months will determine whether it has a hope of
winning the next election.
What Labour doesn’t need is a year of wrangling over its
trade union link: no one outside the party cares about it, and a workable
compromise between the one-member-one-vote brigade and the rest can be easily
negotiated. With an election probably four years away (and who knows what state
the economy will be in then?), there is also no point in getting bogged down in
the minute detail of policy. That was one of the main mistakes last time
around: Labour fought an election in the depths of recession on policies
developed at the height of a boom.
On the other hand, Labour does need to work out its broad
approach to the next election – and it cannot be content to leave things be and
hope that the Tories will continue to self-destruct. “One more heave” is not
enough; nor is tepid right-wing revisionism masquerading as “modernisation”.
Labour must develop a radical populist vision of the Britain it wants.
The first task is to sort out economic policy. There is
nothing wrong with being committed to redistribution of income and wealth from
rich to poor: indeed, such a commitment should remain at the heart of Labour’s
appeal. But Labour came across in 1992 as the party of redistribution and
nothing else – and that is not enough.
The party desperately needs an economic policy to persuade
voters that a Labour government really would reduce unemployment. The next year
must be used to develop precisely such a policy. A central economic policy role
for measures to combat homelessness and underinvestment in transport should be
a prominent feature. So should emphasis on the need for intervention to cope
with the post-cold-war collapse of the defence industries and for Europe-wide
strategies for growth.
The second key area for policy development is the political
side of European union. Labour has to recognise that it is now inevitable that
the Maastricht bill will be passed whatever the party does. The party’s
priorities, rather than line-by-line examination of the bill’s contents, should
be to get Maastricht out of the way as soon as possible and then to replace
the current European policy fudge. Labour should rid itself of the last vestiges
of its historic anti-Europeanism, making the core of its European policy calls
for a massive increase in the powers of the European Parliament and for the
creation of a democratically accountable European federal executive.
Thirdly, the party needs to address the question of
democratising the British state. The Plant commission on electoral systems will finalise its recommendations early this year. Labour should reject conservative
arguments for the status quo and go wholeheartedly for the German additional
member system for the House of Commons. The introduction of regional assemblies
and Scottish and Welsh parliaments, also elected by AMS, should be given a
high priority, as should the replacement of the House of Lords with a second
chamber composed of representatives of Scotland, Wales and the regions.
In line with developing a commitment to democratisation of
the state, Labour should be pushing the case for empowerment of ordinary
people through the democratisation of everyday life. Giving people a greater
say at work – with a programme to encourage rapid growth of producer
co-operatives and democratic employee share-ownership schemes, and commitments
to a “co-determination” model of industrial relations and positive rights for
trade unions – are essential.
The fifth crucial area for immediate action is environment
policy. An unequivocal embrace of radical environmentalist policies,
particularly on energy and transport, is long overdue.
Finally, Labour has to make sure that its Commission on
Social Justice does not simply become a vehicle for rightwing ideas for
getting rid of universal child benefits or pensions. If the commission really
is to be a “new Beveridge”, it must look at the whole of the welfare state
rather than just tax and benefits, and must be prepared to take seriously such
radical ideas as the basic income guarantee.
Perhaps this is too long a list of tasks for a single year –
but unless Labour takes on at least a substantial part of it, it will be
difficult to avoid the conclusion that the party’s appearance of drift over the
past six months signifies something much worse than the inevitable lull after
an election defeat and change of leadership.
