Where do we go from here?

By Alex Smith / @alexsmith1982

I’ve written a very brief few thoughts for the Progress website this afternoon, in which I answer the question: what should Gordon Brown do now?

My short response was to this loaded provocation was to say:

“Gordon Brown needs desperately to remind the country that Labour is the party of unrelenting reform; that change is no empty soundbite, rather that it is a hard-earned Labour principle; and that we have a rare opportunity in this financial and democratic climate to finish the work of remaking our public services so they may serve those who really need them.”

This seems like a very obvious strategy for me – one of postivity, unity, and reaffirming the constant struggle for change and social justice that should always be at the core of Labour values and one which seeks to reject that Brownite obsessive-compulsion to define the opposition while failing to define what it means to be Labour in 2010.

But I am only too aware that such a message of “unrelenting change”, as I put it, is now too easily countered with the riposte that Labour has had twelve, now thirteen, years to make those types of reforms to our financial and democratic system; that Labour are the establishment, the party which blew its massive majority and opportunity for drastic change with war in Iraq, illiberal domestic policy and scandal.

In thinking these things over, I’m reminded of a conversation I had recently, during which it struck me that, based on our shared principles, a bold Labour government would, for example, have abolished the House of Lords in its current format during its first term – and should theoretically, now be onto the task of reforming the monarchy.

And I’m reminded too of Polly Toynbee’s assessment of Tony Blair as a Guardian Icon of the Decade – not so much for his successes, but more for his lamentable missed opportunities:

“Failures weigh down his legacy. He had the power to reform the voting system and re-unite the artificially split parties of the centre-left when he flirted with Paddy Ashdown and proportional representation. He could have changed the political landscape forever, but instead backed off the one fight worth having with the forces of tribal Labour conservatism. Instead the unelected Lords is filled with hereditaries and bishops. Failure to reform the Commons, meanwhile, led directly to the expenses scandal: the culture of “allowances” was a substitute for cutting the numbers and increasing the pay, power and independence of fewer MPs in charge of independent scrutiny committees. While unreformed party funding – notably from motor racing boss Bernie Ecclestone – brought scandal to his name. Labour never had such power, money, good fortune and goodwill. Yet how little he left to show for it, and how much he could have done. He promised to take us “to the heart of Europe”, but left behind a country more Europhobic than ever – and more despised in a Europe that he berated to appease Rupert Murdoch. He knew how to win, but not what do with his three remarkable victories.”

Of course, you don’t easily reach an impasse with your ideals – you don’t lose hope entirely – just because strands of faith have been partly misspent by those to whom it was entrusted. Rather, I’ve become involved in the party now to try to channel my beliefs into changing it, so it might one day achieve more, and go further and do better.

If the party is still to recover to the position to be able to do that, Gordon Brown should also find a new sense of humility and contrition and he should admit that Labour has at times had its prirorities muddled.

To paraphrase Jackson Browne, Labour needs to confront its failures, or it risks forgetting them. Who knows, Gordon may even be able to get in a subtle dig at his predecessor.