THE SPECTATOR
THE ALLIANCE TAKES OVER
The calculations which will decide the election date now concern above all the Alliance: whether the Alliance will reach that mysterious 'breakthrough point' dur- ing the campaign; whether the Alliance Will then start taking marginals from the Tories and somehow, even more myster- i°uslY, raise the danger of putting Mr Kinnock into No 10; whether to wait until October in the belief that the Alliance has 'peaked' already; whether, in the event of a decision to wait until October, to let Mr Keith Best MP get away with his shifty share-dealing so as to avoid a summer by-election in marginal Anglesey, which might give yet another 'boost' to the Alliance; whether there is any chance that, if Mr Tebbit shuts up about it, the voters Will once more become bored stiff with the Alliance.
To that extent, then, the Labour Party has already been 'marginalised' — the great, long-term goal of all who want British politics to become nice again. That goal is not be scoffed at. It would indeed be nice to have politics which avoid such nastiness as this week's Commons debate on Labour's motion denouncing 'inequal- ity'. The suspiciously well cared for Mr Hattersley puffed away about his poor constituents, while his opponents jeered at him about his Georgian house off Smith Square, and his famous lunches. The ran- corous mode, which for years has been the only way in which Labour has discussed economics, brings out the worst in us all. What Mr Hattersley calls 'inequalities' are actually differences, a much less emotional word and much less fun to hurl at your opponents. Most voters accept that we should be a country with income differ- ences. So does the Alliance. There are limits therefore to the extent to which the Alliance can exploit the sad truth that some people are poorer than others. When they replace Labour as the main Opposi- tion, they will still posture and exaggerate, as do the Tories. But there will be limits. The air will be sweeter.
But all that is some distance away. For the moment, the task is to bring about a situation in which Government and Opposition are provided by the Conserva- tives and the Alliance — not necessarily in that order — and with the Labour Party reduced to the historic function of the French Communist Party. This will corres- pond roughly to what most people seem to want, in so far as it is possible to say what most people want. Great vested interests are involved in trying to prevent this idyllic state of affairs. Naturally one of them is the Labour Party. But another is the Con- servative Party.
For the Tories, Labour extremism has been a goldmine. Why lose it now? The ideal election result for Central Office would be a decisive Tory majority, Labour reduced to its crumbling heartland, but still the main Opposition, and the Alliance more or less where it now is. With the Alliance as main opposition, Tory prop- aganda would have to be subtler and more imaginative. Mrs Shirley Williams could be blamed for illiteracy, since she was Secret- ary for Education many years before. Mr Roy Jenkins could be blamed for the permissive society, with Mr Steel sharing the guilt on account of his Abortion Bill long ago, in the now discredited 1960s. But neither Mr Jenkins nor Mrs Williams is the SDP leader, or the one who would be Prime Minister should the Alliance form a government in the foreseeable future. Dr Owen is. Central Office would have a hard time calling him irresponsible. He radiates responsibility. There would be only one thing for it. To win elections, the Tories would have to rely on their policies.
As it happens, their policies at the moment are perfectly defensible on trade union reform, defence and getting inflation down. But they have fought shy of really bringing down taxation and public spend- ing, extending private education and health, and freeing the housing and em- ployment markets. As it is, the Govern- ment's policies on taxation, public spend- ing, health and education, and even Aids advertising, are little different from what the Alliance's would be. Indeed, they have a distinct air about them of officialdom and the old liberal consensus.
The Alliance as Her Majesty's Opposi- tion would force the Tories to be bolder. Perhaps the Tories would lose a general election as a result. They have got to lose soMetime. But with the Alliance as Gov- ernment, no harm, beyond that caused by inexperience and by the more lunatic Liberals, would befall the state, just a lot of boredom.
How exactly to reach that desirable state of affairs — radical Toryism alternating with tedium — is a question to which no one knows the answer. But we are confi- dent that its time will come.
Previous page
