On Monday's Newsnight, shadow prisons minister Helen Goodman MP debated Lord Glasman on the 'Blue Labour' concept; here, she further critiques the idea.
On Monday’s Newsnight, shadow prisons minister Helen Goodman MP debated Lord Glasman on the ‘Blue Labour’ concept; here, she further critiques the idea
Blue Labour’s thesis is that a return to the ideas and practices prevalent at the foundation of the Labour Party – solidarity and reciprocity – can form the basis of significant social change. In my essay “Tradition and Change: Four People – A Response to the Politics of Paradox” (pdf), I view the thesis from the perspective of two communities.
First, the hill farmers of Teesdale, a paradigmatic community whose rights and way of life on the Commons have existed for more than 600 years; then, I look at the Durham Miner’s Gala and the needs of the former coalfields.
The first impression might be that these are very traditional communities and would benefit from the Blue Labour approach. But if we look more deeply, it becomes clear that while voluntarism and co-operation have a part to play, the forces and structure in the modern world require far more than this for them to flourish.
In both cases, only government can take the national and international action they need.
Secondly, I look at the stories of a mother and a priest, where the importance of the welfare state in providing security and opportunities becomes clear. My grandmother collected insurance subs for the ambulance; after the advent of the NHS this wasn’t necessary.
You could of course argue that this community building activity was lost, but most people would prefer to dial 999 in an emergency. I am worried that Blue Labour will be hijacked by those whose real agenda is to destroy the welfare state on which so many people depend.
In my essay, I also show how David Cameron’s ‘Big Society’ approach fails to understand that the modern voluntary sector is a partner of government.
Secure communities with strong ties are important, but Labour’s tradition is richer than this- equality, justice, democracy and liberty need to be woven into the fabric. I have written this response to inspire debate within the Labour Party and to create discourse about future direction of policy.
Labour lost the election in 2010, and I am pleased that we are now having the chance to debate the Party’s next moves. I hope that my critique of Politics of Paradox will provoke a discussion about the ideas I have presented and encourage others to add their views.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
9 Responses to “Labour frontbencher Helen Goodman: My fears about Blue Labour”
Shamik Das
. @BBCNewsnight @BBCMichaelCrick RT @leftfootfwd: Labour frontbencher @HelenGoodmanMP: My fears about Blue Labour: http://bit.ly/lYams9
Mabel Horrocks
. @BBCNewsnight @BBCMichaelCrick RT @leftfootfwd: Labour frontbencher @HelenGoodmanMP: My fears about Blue Labour: http://bit.ly/lYams9
William
Winning an election in the future?Appealing to voters in non urban England and the south east?Admitting that GOVERNMENT is often the problem, not the solution?Recognising that a 1947 welfare state is not the model for the next twenty five years?
oldpolitics
It’s, er, very blue. Apart from misunderstanding what Jonathan Rutherford is saying about gender, I’m not in the slightest bit clear what she is actually disagreeing with them about.
Dave Citizen
Helen – I think I know what you’re getting at but my view is that Labour needs to be much bolder if it is to offer a real alternative model rather than simply fight a rear guard action designed to soften the blows so to speak.
Arguing about policy decisions makes little sense unless it is done with knowledge of the basic goals the party is trying to achieve:
What levels of inequality does Labour believe strike about the right balance for a healthy Britain (are we talking Sweden, Japan, Germany or bigger gaps like Israel, Singapore or even the USA (I hope not!))
What’s Labour’s view on things like renting land and property to business – does it help the competitiveness of our economy for farmers and others to have to pay substantial rents to vast landowning estates or the “aristocracy”?
Does labour think the ability of a rich elite to send their children to expensive private schools is compatible with equal opps and building a healthy meritocracy?
Depending on answers to such questions we might better judge policy decisions and whether those of us without access to such privileges want to take part in building our (whose?) communities.