POLITICS
Why even a recession may not defeat Mr Blair
BRUCE ANDERSON
It has been a remarkable year; Mr Blair seems to have rewritten the political rule- book. A year ago, three assumptions were widely held: that British politics would remain volatile, that the public would remain disillusioned with politics and that Labour would find it very difficult to make the adjustment from opposition to govern- ment.
The third point appeared to be self-evi- dent. There had been a minimum of intel- lectual preparation on Labour's part; most of the incoming ministers had no idea of the complexity of the tasks which they would face. Mr Blair and his entourage also seemed to think that they would be able to maintain the same authoritarian control over Labour in government as they had over the Labour party during the previous three years, and that government would merely be opposition from a smarter address. There would surely have to be a rapid readjustment and a painful rethink.
That has not happened, nor — so far has it been necessary. Mr Blair would appear to have achieved something which eluded both his immediate predecessors, and every other modern prime minister He has fused government and politics. For the previous 18 years, many ministers had behaved as if politics was something that happened only at election time, and a lot of them never seemed to be at ease with the machinery of government. Malcolm Ritkind often used to say that the differ- ence between government and opposition was that 'we have got the Maxim-gun and they have not'. But some of his colleagues never learned to point the gun at the enemy rather than at their own side. It is all very different these days.
As soon as they had won the last elec- tion, Messrs Blair, Campbell and Mandel- son set about planning the next. one. Unlike many of their Tory predecessors, they know exactly why they are in government: to be re-elected. That has provided them with a formidable political momentum, which shows no signs of abating.
It does not mean that they have avoided mistakes; there have been plenty of those, as well as a considerable degree of idleness. Below a thin layer at the top of the front bench, this is not an impressive govern- ment. There are a lot of time-servers and incompetents, and it is just as well that most of them are determined to stay on- message and always scan their pagers anx- iously for instructions; if they were to try to act independently, the results could be dis- astrous. Moreover, several ministers whose ability is not in question have done more than anyone to get Mr Blair into trouble. Gordon Brown, Robin Cook, Derry Irvine: at moments all three of those Scotsmen appeared to be competing for the James VI and I memorial prize, awarded to the wisest fool in government.
The Blair team has also displayed a ten- dency which could yet cause it serious prob- lems: it is not committed to honesty. Over Lord Simon's shareholdings, Lord Irvine's refurbishments and Mr Ecclestone's dona- tion, a pattern has emerged. The initial answers were both dismissive and mislead- ing, and in each case the truth had to be extracted with a forceps. Much of this stems from arrogance — why should we bother to give the Tories honest answers? — and if this continues, it will eventually be penalised. But thus far, prevarications which would have landed the Major gov- ernment in endless difficulties have gone unnoticed.
This is largely the Tories' fault. The pre- sent opposition has tried to pursue such matters, with some diligence, but it is still suffering from the successes of the previous Tory opposition: the one which wrecked John Major's government. By election day, the Tories were widely believed to be not only incompetent but contemptible. The party was supported by fewer than one in three of those who voted, and it is probable that at least a third of them did so while holding their noses. They thought that they could hear ancestral voices prophesying income tax increases, so they stayed loyal, just, but many former Tories have been delighted to find that their fears were groundless; hence Mr Blair's poll ratings.
Hence also the errors in the assumptions about disillusion and volatility. The British people do not enjoy being disillusioned about their government and their institu- tions, so they are grateful to Mr Blair for rescuing them. In view of that, it may be that the normal pattern of electoral change will reassert itself, that 1997 was simply a record-breaking aberration, and that we will return to a world in which a five per cent swing at a general election would be almost unthinkable.
Mr Blair has a further advantage. Inas- much as the British electorate relies on the government to boost its self-esteem, the last government failed to deliver. As a result of the Labour spin doctors' skills and their own rhetorical incompetence, the Tories came to be seen as mean-spirited and uncaring. Otherwise intelligent people had come to believe that because she had once said that there was no such thing as society, Margaret Thatcher was to blame for every social ill in Britain.
Labour have not only capitalised bril- liantly on that mood; they have assessed its moral depth. The British people want to be told how compassionate and noble-minded they were, fully worthy to be devotees of the Princess of Wales. But they do not want to pay higher taxes for the privilege. So Mr Blair has invented costless caring, which could continue to pay considerable elec- toral dividends.
This might help him to survive a mild recession, as could the nature of the likely economic downturn. British manufacturing is already suffering, but there are two rea- sons why Mr Blair need not feel excessively anxious. First, manufacturing only accounts for about a quarter of the modern British economy; second, any manufacturing reces- sion is likely to be an old-fashioned one, in that its damaging consequences will be felt in those regions which are accustomed to economic stringency. The recession of the early Nineties caused a crisis for the Tories precisely because it hit hardest in areas and among social classes which had never expe- rienced hardship.
A recession would cause some problems for the PM, and if the populace did come to feel a little jaundiced about its govern- ment, his preachy style could easily start to grate. But there is no sign of that happen- ing yet, and it need not be induced by a recession limited to manufacturing, while the majority of the voters continue to enjoy rising living standards.
Up to now, British elections have always been won one at a time; the early honey- moon has always been succeeded by the attritional mid-term. But this could be an exception. It's the economy, stupid; it is also those stupid Tories who are still wal- lowing in the mire of five years of self- indulgence and self-destruction. The Tories left Tony Blair such a wonderful legacy, political and economic, that it will be very hard for him to dissipate it in a single term.
Previous page
