Next Labour must build beyond Miliband’s manifesto

In a post-electoral debate, Professor Tim Bale urged Labour to take note of the Tories’ playbook: campaign at the centre, shift the debate from Government. Prospective leaders would be wise to hear it and separate tone from substance. They should also be aware that crafting a manifesto able to shift UK leftwards will be challenging.

The current difficulties of Labour lie in the increasingly opposing interests of Middle Classes, white British working class, metropolitan elites, and disenfranchised minorities. The fragmentation of Labour’s coalition is not new: the “winter of discontent” can be seen as the first emergence of these conflicts. Eighteen years later, the great success of New Labour was to find a platform under which these disparaged groups were able to rally behind.

The leadership contest should be a discussion on how build this platform rather than a sterile debate on wars past or which of these constituencies to prioritise. This does not mean a return towards a New Labour, which may very well have been the answer at the time, but now it feels outdated. Even Tony Blair acknowledged that they were too cavalier with rising inequality.

Well known is the work of economists Thomas Piketty and Tony Atkinson charting the concentration on incomes across the richest 1% although not enough attention is paid on how this trend diverges across countries. Since the 80s the British State has been relatively inefficient in reducing inequality, a trend only slightly improved under Labour’s watch. This weak redistribution can be explained by the structure of inequality. As political scientists Noam Lupu and Jonas Pontusson pointed, in countries where middle incomes have risen ahead of lower incomes support for redistribution tends to be lower. This is precisely UK’s case. Those at the top rose astronomically, but middle incomes also rose steeply in respect lower incomes. Upon this fragmentation George Osborne and Linton Crosby built a Tory majority.

Rebuilding a coalition that is “Aspirational” to middle incomes and low incomes is the challenge that Labour needs to overcome. To do it so, it may not be wise to discount Miliband years. Despite his electoral defeat, Miliband’s manifesto seemed a genuine attempt to reconcile these interests, albeit a flawed one. Instead of a compelling vision of Labour at the 21^st century it was a compilation of retail policies defending disparaged interests.

There is so much to debate on how to deliver this progressive vision instead. But it’s  urgent that Labour moves forwards the terms of discussion beyond Miliband-lites and Tory-lites. Take Education for example, rather than muck about free schools, an ambitious early years programme may be the best tool for reducing the inequality on the long term and, as Nobel Economist James Heckman recalls, the best investment to strengthen the economy.

Kathleen Thelen –Professor of Political Science at MIT- has pointed out that the egalitarian success of Nordic Countries lies in adaptation of its institutions to globalisation rather than preservation. If Labour wants to deliver a new progressive Britain, his left needs to go beyond his comfort zone and rethink progressive policies rather than defend entrenched interests, his right must explain how address inequality without being hostile to business; both must know that fighting old battles will only entrench Tories in power.

Jaume Martorell Cruz is a PhD researcher at the Centre for Globalisation Research, School of Business and Management, Queen Mary University of London.