Analyse the transition from 'Old' Labour to 'New' Labour.

Paul Ambrose A259446

Analyse the transition from ‘Old’ Labour to ‘New’ Labour

Introduction

To analyse the development of the Labour Party it is logical to start with understanding how it began, and from there study the continuing evolution of one of Britain’s most influential political parties. I will be documenting the changes in policy regarding the economy, nationalisation, the welfare state, political institutions and the party’s political positioning.

Labour’s Beginnings

In the late 19th century there was an economic downturn which lead to an increase in legislative controls on trade unionism. This prompted the unions to realise they would no longer be able to achieve their goals simply through industrial action. The formation of the Labour Representation Committee (the LRC) on the 27th February 1900, in the hope of representing the working people of England politically, can be considered the true beginnings of the Labour Party.

The LRC began with the idea of mass membership, a system by which the leaders and representatives of the party are supposed to voice the views and beliefs of the masses. This lead to a ‘bottom-up’ party structure that was to prevent major reform taking place quickly as leaders have to act on members views.

Old Labour Views

The party began with very distinct left wing views. The strong role that the trade unions played in the party’s direction due to its ‘bottom up’ composition, meant that its whole ethos was that of helping the common man rather than maintaining the wealth of the upper and middle classes. Economically the party believed in setting the maintenance of full employment as its priority, an ideological aim which was inevitable due to Labour’s makeup. It also believed in a managed economy, government control of interest rates and attempting to even out cyclical fluctuations in the business cycle.

‘Old’ Labour believed in taking ‘key’ industries into public ownership i.e. Nationalisation, and using government money to improve and maintain them. This was to be found in the party constitution as the famous ‘Clause IV’. ‘Clause IV’ was to ‘reserve for the producers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry… upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production the best attainment system of popular administration & control of each industry or service.’

Further revolutionary ideas included the introduction of what we now know as the ‘Welfare State’. This included state benefits and the introduction of the National Health Service (NHS), establishing an obligation on the government’s part to members of society ‘from the cradle to the grave’. These views resulted in an ideally very strong, centralised government which ruled the country proactively.

Changing Times

The first Labour government came in 1923 when the conservatives fought their electoral campaign on the single issue of protectionism. Although the conservatives still won, their leader at the time, Stanley Baldwin, declined to take government after failing to secure the mandate he sought. Thus, lead by Ramsey MacDonald the first labour government was formed upon the King’s request. This first government had modest objectives due to it holding 67 seats less than the conservative party and decided to show a fitness to govern rather than following its ideals. Its reign was ended after only a few months by the Zinoviev letter scandal, linking the party with Russian communists. The party’s second spell in government was again a short lived one with a second minority. This time however the leadership of the party left to join the conservatives, removing the more socialist middle ground element of the party and leaving the party free to be truer to its mass left wing beliefs.

This is a preview of the whole essay

The conservatives returned to power in 1931 and remained there until the Second World War, when a coalition government of Labour and Churchill’s Liberals took over. Churchill brought Labour’s Clement Attlee and Greenwood into the war cabinet as well as bringing in Bevin as minister for Labour, although he held no position as an MP. During this time the trade unions consolidated their power due to the crucial role they played in the first ‘total war’. Bevin played no small part in this, introducing many new social policies. In exchange for workforce cooperation, working conditions were improved, employers were made liable for their workers welfare and nursery schools were introduced at the factories to ensure that women could work in them. This, along with the other changes in the role of the state, necessitated by the all-encompassing nature of the war, resulted in a massive shift in public opinion to the left and for a more active state.

The post-war Labour manifesto, Let us face the future, proposed widespread nationalisation, a bold house building programme and the creation of the National Health Service and was received well by the voters (The People’s Party, Carter & Wright, 1997).

In 1945 Labour came to power with a majority government for the first time. With this majority all the proposed public ownership schemes set out in the manifesto became realised, one by one; The Bank of England (1946), Coal (1947), Railways (1948), Road Transport (1948), Electricity (1948), Gas (1949) and Iron & Steel (1951). All of this was made possible by the parliamentary strength of Labour and the pacifist political mood after the war.

Along with this bold nationalisation programme came one of the most important changes of Britain’s political history, the creation of the National Health Service (NHS) in 1946. Designed to ‘secure the improvement in the physical and mental health of the people’ the NHS was to be Labour’s most valued achievement. This period captured the ethos of ‘Old’ Labour, demonstrating the highly dominant role the centralised government played.

In the 1951 elections Labour ran out of steam and suffered a defeat at the hands of the Tories. It then remained a disillusioned party until 1964. In this period the party split into three main groups. The left wing section, lead by Nye Bevan consisted mainly of fundamentalists who had frequently opposed the leadership during the 1945 administration. The right wing of the party, headed by Morrison, believed that the Attlee administration had achieved socialism, rather than just making the first step. Finally, the centre of the party argued that socialism should now focus on social inequality rather than nationalisation. These revisionist arguments had been heard before the war in the 30’s and were prompted into resurgence by the experiences of the 1945 government. They argued that the character of the British society had changed and that they should now change to accommodate this. Anthony Crossland, the author of The Future Of Socialism, saw it as his mission to transform the Labour party in just such a way. He argued that nationalisation had become confused as a key socialist aim, rather than a method by which socialism could be achieved and that it was no longer relevant. He also believed that there were now commitments that were shared by the parties; full employment and a welfare state, while a consensus existed against laissez-faire economics, no state intervention and poor social provision. His third main argument was that new methods were now needed to achieve socialism. He decided that the method through which to achieve socialism was no longer public ownership but instead now lay with economic growth and social equality. This was the first time that the founding ideas of the labour party were coming into contention and it was being suggested that they move away from their ideology in search of votes.

These three groups fought amongst themselves within the party, with the ‘Bevanites’ causing havoc, resulting in the reinstatement of standing party orders in 1952. At the 1952 party conference Attlee condemned the Bevanites as a ‘party within the party’ and consequently a resolution was passed by the Parliamentary Party in October criticising the organised faction (The People’s Party, Carter & Wright, 1997).

The defeat at the 1955 election due to union action reflecting badly on Labour resulted in changes in the party with some of the more senior posts being vacated by older members, leaving them open for a new, younger generation. Attlee was replaced by Gaitskell, the youngest leader since 1894. A working group was appointed within the party to look at reasons for the defeat at the ballot boxes. The following report directed the party to target marginal constituencies and the modernisation of its party structure. After the 1959 electoral defeat Clause IV, the cornerstone of previous manifestos, came under fire by Gaitskell and other members of the party. At the conference in 1960 it was decided that no change would be made but there would be a new twelve-point plan of the party’s objectives.

After Gaitskell’s death in 1963 Harold Wilson took over and lead the party to victory in the 1964 elections on the back of a manifesto promising economic and social transformation. The majority of this came with reforms regarding divorce, homosexuality, abortion, the nationalisation of the steel industry, the implementation of comprehensive education and an end to capital punishment. This can be considered as the start in the change from ‘Old’ Labour to ‘New’ Labour, with the party beginning to move more towards the centre ground and the voting public’s support.

Wilson’s administration was ended rather surprisingly in 1970 amid economic improvements, however he remained at the head of the party. During the years leading up to the 1974 election there was again internal turmoil, only this time over the future in Europe. This was dispelled in 1975 when a referendum supported participation in the common market. Wilson was replaced in 1976 by Callaghan but Labours period of government was ended shortly after following the uprising of public sector workers and the ‘winter of discontent’.

When Labour was heavily defeated in 1979 it began another period of reflection and soul searching. In this time it moved further to the left and Callaghan was replaced by Michael Foot. The party also split into two with a breakaway group, the Social Democratic Party, forming an alliance with the Liberals. The 1983 manifesto has been labelled as ‘the longest suicide note in history’ and resulted in a huge defeat. Foot was soon replaced by Neil Kinnock who sought to move the party more to the centre ground and distance the main body from the left wing ‘militants’. The Red Flag emblem was replaced by the red rose at the 1986 conference and although Labour’s image was changed they still lost the 1987 elections heavily. The following policy review resulted in an end to nuclear disarmament commitment, and away from high taxation and nationalisation. Although Kinnock managed to begin reforming Labour, they still lost the 1992 election in similar style to the previous one.

Kinnock’s successor was John Smith who vowed to continue to reform the party and achieved the marked change of the end to block union voting with ‘One Man One Vote’ at the 1993 conference. This transformed the party structure and paved the way for much more reform as the leadership no longer had to contend with the ‘bottom up’ design that the party had been founded upon. When Black Wednesday rocked the UK economy to the core Smith attacked the Tories in parliament and managed to bring Labour to the verge of power. When he died of a heart attack in 1994, on the verge of electoral victory Tony Blair was elected as the new leader of the party. In 1995 at a special conference he won vast support for the updating of Clause IV that had kept the party centred around Nationalisation for the majority of its political life. The draft manifesto New Labour, New Life for Britain won widespread support in 1996 and was based around 5 key pledges; Education, Crime, Health, Jobs and Economic stability.

These changes can be seen as the completion of the transition from ‘Old’ to ‘New’ Labour, and what is in all a completely different party to the one proposed on February 27th 1900 when a group of union representatives got together with some minority political groups.

New Labour’s Views

New Labour can be considered as placed firmly in the middle of the political spectrum, with vastly differing views to its predecessor. It has completely different views on nearly all of the original trademarks of ‘Old’ Labour, apart from the welfare state. As regards the sacred ‘Clause IV’ New Labour has moved in completely the opposite direction, choosing to privatise everything possible. New Labour believes in supply side economics and a much greater role for the market, compared with the government intervention favoured by Old Labour. There has also been a change in economic priorities, moving away from maintaining ‘full’ employment and instead preferring to focus on low, stable inflation. It’s only the position regarding the welfare state that Labour remains on similar ground to its origins, still committed to the NHS and increasing spending. Although, even here it has altered its pledges and instead places more responsibility on the individual (pensions, private health etc.)

Conclusion

Initially the Labour party set out with far left wing views aimed at voicing the opinions of the trade unions in parliament. It believed in Nationalising key industries, government economic intervention, strong central government and above all representing the common man’s views. After the 1945 administration the party chose to move away from their ideologies and go in search of votes instead, a similar decision to that of the conservative party after their crushing post-war defeat. This was the beginning of the transformation from a party designed to represent the unions in parliament into one that searches for votes and power.

In some ways the two party’s ideals have remained the same, the representation of the common man, only now the maturity of the economy has resulted in the common man no longer working in industry and belonging to the trade unions but now occupying a desk job.

Paul Ambrose A259446

Bibliography

British Political History 1867-1995, Democracy and Decline

Second Edition

Pearce. M and Stewart. G.

Published 1992, 1996 by Routledge, London

New British Politics

Second Edition

Budge. Ian, Crewe. Ivor, McKay. David and Newton. Ken

Published 2001 by Pearson Education

New Labour in Power – presidents and prospects

Brivati. B and Bale. T

Published 1997 by Routledge, London

Modern British History since 1900

Black. Jeremy.

Published 2000 by Macmillan Press LTD

The Peoples Party

Wright. Tony, Cartere. Matt

Published 1997 by Thames and Hudson LTD

www.Labour.org.uk

Analyse the transition from 'Old' Labour to 'New' Labour.

Paul Ambrose A259446