There were a number of immediately striking things about Ed Miliband’s speech to Labour conference. The first is that he has clearly ignored the experience of Labour since the 1950s and forgotten that elections are won on the centre ground of politics. There was little in the speech to appeal to aspirational voters and very little to reassure voters that the Labour Party is a moderate party on the centre ground of British politics, where elections are won. There was plenty to appeal to the already decided, but precious little to appeal to the nation at large or to reassure the wider country that Labour was serious about regaining its economic credibility and working for growth and jobs.
The second really notable element was the booing of Tony Blair’s name. A pretty remarkable moment for a party to boo the name of a man who transformed a party which had slumped to four successive defeats into one that won three successive victories. Blair understood that elections are won on the centre ground and in doing that, he not only pulled the Labour Party to the centre but also had the added effect of pulling the Conservatives to the centre ground as well. In building a remarkable election-winning machine, Blair understood the importance of Labour appealing outside its comfort zone. There was little of that in Ed Miliband’s speech yesterday.
Tony Blair famously said that, “there's only one tradition I hated: losing. I hated the 1980s not just for our irrelevance but for our revelling in irrelevance.” He understood the importance of building a broad-based electoral coalition, based on a reputation for moderation, credibility and competence. This electorally-successful coalition is built on the centre ground and based on the party being perceived as a national, not sectional party. Too much of Miliband’s speech yesterday was sectional, rather than national – aimed at the hall rather than the nation. Sectionalism is not how elections are won. Perhaps those delegates who booed Blair’s name should reflect on the fact that, by the time of the next election, it will have been 49 years since a Labour leader other than Tony Blair won a fully working overall majority at a general election.
The third fascinating element was Miliband’s description of himself as an outsider. When politicians look to label themselves, they should at least seek to do it in a credible way. With the unpopularity of political, media and financial elites, there is a strong political argument for somebody standing as an outsider against those elites. A people versus powerful figure could make a big contribution to the debate.
But it is very difficult to see how Ed Miliband could credibly be labeled as an outsider. As the son of a Socialist academic who regularly had Labour cabinet ministers as house guests when he was growing up, Miliband had doors open for him that would not have been the case for people from working class backgrounds. The path from Oxford and Harvard, through working in Westminster and then becoming an adviser to Gordon Brown, was not the path of an outsider. It was the path of an insider. It is difficult to describe Ed Miliband’s career as anything other than an insider’s advance.
Labour must remember that their election result last year was even worse than that in 1931 – it was their second worst performance since 1918. Labour’s vote amongst the skilled working class was the lowest since the war. This realisation should have inspired Ed Miliband to build an electoral coalition on the centre ground. Yesterday’s speech suggests that Labour still has a long way to go to learn the lessons of Tony Blair’s success.
David Skelton is deputy director of Policy Exchange. You can follow him on Twitter @djskelton
Comments
NoelleN / September 29 2011 2:54am
"The third fascinating element was Miliband’s description of himself as an outsider."
Were we listening to the same speech? Miliband never claimed himself an outsider. In fact, what he said was that he had the "heritage of the outsider" and the "vantage of an insider". Big difference.
Bob Slattery / September 29 2011 7:14am
Let us hope it takes them many, many years to learn that lesson.
Jack / September 30 2011 9:00am
You have fallen for the hype of the pro-Blair lobby. Far from being Labour's most successful leader, because of his adoption of right-wing policies, Blair presided over the destruction of the Labour Party.
In 1997 Labour was given a massive majority and through his desire to swing Labour to the right, Blair squandered that majority, losing votes at each subsequent election culminating in Labour's humiliation last year, not helped of course by Brown's dithering.