Riddell (1997-2010) (1)
1. Riddell provides the case for Clause IV (CIV) being a troublesome element in the Party’s history as far back as Gaitskell, who tried to reform it. The issue was not the executive desire to remove CIV, but more-so the declined ability of the Union to challenge/ even to accept the changes in the climate of the 1990s. Knock on effect from Thatcher? The link could be explored
Robinson & Twyman (1997-2010) (2)
1. Data on the notion of progressive- its general lack of a solid definition among the public, and misinterpretation as just a force for modernisation. 2. Critically important information is the representation of David Cameron as in front of Miliband and Tony Blair as a modernising force
Toye (1997-2010) (2)
1. what is new in new labour is the forces of Old Labour are so weak. It is the dominance and self-confidence of modernisers, not their novelty, which distinguishes the Blair Party from predecessors 2. Shift in the balance of powers
Meredith (1997-2010) (1)
1. Defends equality under labour, suggests Crosland’s revisionist nature would have adapted to the economy and globalisation in same way as NL
Hall (1997-2010) (2)
1. New Labour has succumbed to a sweeping view of globalisation, which provides ‘dubious legitimacy' of the third way project. 2. Globalisation is treated as if it were an irresistible force of nature.
Fielding (1997-2010) (4)
1. Core values thesis - Blair’s old/new dichotomy reflects ill informed prejudices 2. Society changed: -1979 - 32% in manufacturing - 1997 - 18% -Service - 58%-75% -Trade unions - 12 mil to 7 mil. 3. Compared to 1979 - Unions much weaker and so less able to resist Labour leadership’s long-standing desire to pander to capitalism LRC was only committed to improving the legal position of trade unions in capitalism. 4. Considered that the party’s failure to fully embrace grater levels of state control was at the root of its electoral malaise. The former, called revisionists, represented by Gaitskell, broke through with Industry and Society in 1957, failed to win in 1959.
Hickson (1997-2010) (1)
1. Rejection of Meredith - conception of equality of opportunity fails to recognise underlying socio-economic inequality 2. Key division - interpretation of democratic inequality and social justice 3. Social justice allows for the sense of an undeserving poor, democratic equality recognises that a low-performance strata of society is inevitable, and to some extent, desirable.
Bognador (1997-2010) (2)
1. Defender of Blair, on the account of globalisation, individualism and knowledge based economy. 2. Evidences how education was bolstered, still essentially Labour.
Lee (1997-2010) (3)
1. Labour triangulated its position in politics to allow to win its support, at the cost of value-based politics 2. Poplar and Canning Town = C2 and DE Voters - declined by 21.1% in 2005 3. Labour’s historical social constituency has been collapsing. The simple but not insubstantial answer is that fewer C2 and DE voters and fewer people in the North of England and in Greater London feel a strong affinity for Labour
FSB (1997-2010) (1)
1. The language of class changed, but too simple to say this was simply the result of appealing to the middle class - about appealing to the new working class
Driver (1997-2010) (2)
1. Provides models and explanation of how Labour has been moving right since Gaitskell. Model of significance - catch-up accommodation and the movement of the centre ground NL Showed little respect for Labour’s sacred cows: state ownership, economic planning, Keynesian Demand management, full employment, tax-and-spend welfarism and close links to trade unions Brown - Iron Chancellor - found extra resources for health and education 2. Does the loss of public ownership as a means of socialist policy constitute a loss of socialist goals? Tudor Jones, 1989 - YES - ‘For what is at stake is not the outmoded instrument of policy. Public ownership has meant more to Labour than that. Since 1918 it has played a central role in the party’s thinking, programmes and strategy’ - Jones also criticises how far Blair’s central arguments that socialism is ethical rather than an economic doctrine
Crime (1997-2010) (8)
1. Tough on crime, tough on causes of crime 2. Poor parenting 3. Low school achievement 4. Drug and alcohol abuse 5. Unemployment 6. Care in the community 7. Homelessness 8. Lack of facilities for young people
Major - what was the 1992 Election described as?
"Not so much a victory, more an escape" - Robin Cook
What were the rough edges of Thatcherism from a '92 perspective?
What was Kinnock credited with achieving?
Shrewd, ruthless, effective party manager - "taken the knife to the Militant, reduced the policy making role of the trade unions and cast off the doctrinal incubus which had haunted the party in the early 1980s and made it unelectable. Focus: - Social injustice - Class war (failed to shake - led to downfall)
What of the labour apparatus remained crucially untouched?
the union block vote
What was the Tory response to the failings of the 1997 election?
Focus on appeal to core Conservative vote - The trouble was that the Conservative core vote was too narrow, being based on the over-65s and the geographically and socially immobile, to act as a springboard for electoral revival. In 2001, there were actually swings away from the Tories among the professional and managerial classes, 25- to 34-year-olds and ethnic minorities, groups from which they already had low levels of support in 1997.
What was the core appeal of the Tories post Major?
"Tebbit trinity" of Europe, immigration and taxes, or what Tim Bale calls "the politics of the 19th tee"
How many % points behind Labour in 2005? (Tories)
Selsdon - the net Blair effect
1. Economic and welfare policy managed by Gordon Brown, not Blair 2. Economic, constitutional and welfare reform were the legacies of others, like Irvine and John Smith 3. The second Blair government was a 'crazy salad' mixing traditional labourite beliefs in high spending with a Wilson belief in managerialism and a neo-thatcherite attention to the markets
New Labour Term Summary (Selsdon)
First term - policy-light Second term - little achieved constitutionally/ transport,
Major (Bogdanor) - Who is he compared to?
Baldwin - Both unexpected leaders - Formidable - Controversial - Baldwin - "of the utmost insignificance" - Conciliator - Good negotiator - Plagued by foreign policy
How many heard of Major before 1990?
"Never has so much been written about so little"
What position were the Tories in in 1992?
10% behind in opinion polls
What, according to Bogdanor, did Major benefit from?
- Major’s lack of grandeur helped him - Elected more of because of who he wasn’t - 1995 Tory leadership - wasn’t Redwood - believed to be a loser
What did The Sun present Major as?
Where were there internal conflict in Tory ranks? (1999)
Between Major, Hague and Clarke Clarke - fear of moving too far right
What did Major claim about the EU?
it had "phoney threats to delay enlargement"
What was Kinnock remembered for?
"shrewd, ruthless and effective party manager... taken the knife to militant... cast off the doctrinal incubus which had haunted the party"