Labour leadership election - a perspective‏

It was hardly surprising to find that a speech made by Ivan Lewis on Saturday at a Labour north west ‘feedback meeting’ arranged by north west NEC member Pete Wheeler contained some very similar messages to David Miliband writing in Sunday’s Observer. Coincidence? I think not.


Both men have appealed against the old ‘Blair v Brown’ camps and said it was time to renew the party and move on from the past. Phrases such as ‘next labour’ or ‘future labour’ popping into common parlance. Interestingly whilst the mood of the meeting was to allow a decent amount of deliberation on what went wrong for labour Lewis claimed that 8 weeks or so was time enough to find a new leader. The messages of both men appear a bit contrived since it is clear to a blind man on galloping horse that the (former) Blairites have decided on a coronation for David Miliband. Doing so as quickly as possible would serve a purpose. Provided however we can still have an effective opposition to the Con Dem government in these vital few weeks leading up to the first emergency budget what’s the rush?

Andy Burnham, another ex-minister speaker, by contrast was gracious in defeat and seemed genuinely willing to have not a blood-letting in the party but a ‘cathartic period’ to explore what went wrong and how we could renew. Burnham outlined some issues that most present recognised. The absence of women from the campaign and the campaign itself. Burnham’s take on ‘what happened to the Blair Babes’ was again honest. The party having recruited these women then failed to support them as new MPs and failed to help them realise their potential in the combative parliamentary atmosphere. Many he said were simply disaffected by the whole process.

Burnham also recognised why it was unsurprising that NHS workers felt no loyalty to the labour party when the government had for years more less said it didn’t matter if they worked for the NHS. A guarded recognition of the markestisation and provider neutral approach that has for too long sacrificed public sector workers at the alter of neoliberal policies.

Burnham also soundly supported moves to greater transparency in policy making. He was happy to recall the days of the conference being the policy making forum and sovereign policy body of the party and wants to see a return to that. He was not playing to the gallery either as this particularly issue was raised from the floor of the meeting before he arrived by disaffected members of the national policy forum. He appears to have already captured and read the mood of the party.

So where now on the leadership question? David Miliband has sprinkled compliments on Cruddas praising his views on housing, issues of fairness and the BNP. This is Miliband offering recognition of past mistakes and attempting to build a big tent but will it be enough? Cruddas though political sound on many issues I suspect lacks the gravitas of some candidates, not least because he lacks ministerial experience so the olive branch of a position in a Miliband administration makes sense. An Achilles’ heal for the Tories in the last election campaign was few of the top ranking had had any experience in government at ministerial level. A charge that will be levelled at Cruddas.

Burnham by contrast to Miliband is not a particularly strong orator and not as well rehearsed as those that have learned at the knee of Blair. But this in fact gives him an edge because his lack of sound bite answers provides an insight into a more genuine labour politician than the polished performers. He was also one of the few Ministers of State to provide any kind of concession to UNISON recognising that the NHS providers should be the first not last option as a provider of services. I can’t help but think had Burnham had the health brief a couple of years before we would have gone into this last election with a much clearer and more palatable solution to the burning questions of funding future social care.

Should we therefore back him?

To his detractors is he a strong enough character? Could you imagine him as a future Prime Minister? Would he have the ability to take on Cameron at the despatch box? It would in all honesty be a steep learning curve. But in his favour he looks a safe bet for an honest look at how the party manages it's policy making. He looks a safe bet to argue for genuine labour principles of fairness. And yes that does mean a recognition of the value of the State. A recognition that we should be proud to protect worker rights. A recognition that loyalty is earned not simply demanded. Hopefully a candidate that can articulate what labour stands for.

The triangulation of politics has led to the liberal conservatism we now see. If we are to move away from this and provide voters with a genuine left alternative, with labour values of rewarding workers with fairness, protection at work, a right to a decent place to live, a right to a good education regardless of wealth and privilege and recognition, that in a democratic party it is ok to have a few rows in the open, before we arrive at policy positions, then Burnham is certainly worth a punt.

In my view we should be taking soundings in UNISON. Even if he is not a sure fire bet to win the race, by having Burnham in the race, it will allow for that much needed ‘cathartic period’ to renew the party and learn our lessons from defeat. Realigning the party back to its founding principles will be a start on the road to renewal. Burnham has the potential to be a very sound ally.

Anna Rose