New Labour. The term has become rather controversial off-late and I’m unsure as to why. Perhaps it’s because of the issues surrounding the Iraq war, but that is difficult to comprehend because most of the leaders instrumental in crafting New Labour into what it is today, voted in the affirmative for the war.Embed from Getty Images
Granted, it wasn’t Ed who did that because he wasn’t in a position to do so and even if he was, as contemplations often go in politics, he has stated that he wouldn’t vote for it. I don’t find it difficult to believe he wouldn’t have changed his mind, because given his strong support for women-centric politics, for trade unions, it would be unthinkable to colour him with the same paintbrush as that of his predecessors.
He has made a conscious step away from all of the choices that brought his predecessors into the limelight and chosen to carve out a niche for himself in certain rather popular subjects of today. However, some of the socialist agendas that he has aligned himself with tend to be much more deserving of theory rather than practice, and it isn’t history that I am on about, because that would have been a practice during a particular era of Labour, nonetheless.
Miliband has a bit of an activist, “lose control and shelve out power” to local governments, sort of an outlook. He wants to empower the powerless like most politicians but in an economically difficult climate, and when you are a Labour leader, is that the way to go with things? There is a definite move away from stringent socialism for Ed – he couldn’t be further from Marxist ideologies if he tried, so it really is about identifying with certain ways of social thinking than it is about being a loyal Marxist thinker out to revolutionize Westminster, as all the slogans here in England would probably seem, for a fleeting second, to our European neighbours.
There should be more talk about what the structure of things can mean for the party – there isn’t a lot of funding available, unlike how things are for the Tories, and pertaining to matters of immigration to gain votes, isn’t remotely noble or up-to-date on matters. At the moment, political parties are interested for some balancing out of values, they are interested, the big parties, for a centrist ground. Centrist voters are pro-EU membership and consider immigration to have been something positive.
The middle-ground, might not even offer Blairites all the consolation it needs because despite its moderate nature, present trend of popularity seems to be riding high on an extreme point of view, somewhat. It is all about globalisation, and how a lot of people are worried about it despite Blair’s logic that it can also mean a good thing when handled with control.Embed from Getty Images
Ed Miliband needs to promote a Labour government that will work for the people, one that is equipped at problem-solving, and one way to do this about is to take a good, hard look at the cuts that are going to be implemented once Labour is in power. There is so much talk about the general public wanting a government that does things, causes quiet revolutions, as opposed to one that likes to sail across, without so much of a passing glance at how to change things in the United Kingdom.
Perhaps this is the jog to their politics happenings, that they really need. An Opinium/Observer poll has stated that there is a seven point sharp increase for Labour over the Tories, which is a welcoming thought come elections next season. The deficit reduction is one of the primary agendas of a Labour government, and according to the former European commissioner, Peter Mandelson, there needs to be a greater clarity over what the departments budgets could hold post a win in May 2015.
Things do not look too difficult for the Labour Party, actually, because despite Ed’s “red” agenda, the party is interested to cut the economic deficit, very much in 2015. Infrastructure spending, protecting the NHS, as a party in power, once more, much like the times of Attlee’s “the welfare state”, are on our party’s agenda. And I’m pleased to see that we’ve been able to get Alex Salmond on board too, if there is ever a repeat of the 2010 general election consensus of a Labour minority election outcome.
Salmond has said that the SNP is interested in putting conventional politics aside, in the hope of seeing a Labour win in England in May 2015. At the present moment, with how things stand, SNP MPs here at Westminster do not vote on any English-only legislation, they choose to abstain. He has spoken on how he feels that these subjects couldn’t be further away from how politics functions in Scotland, but it can mean a great deal to the government elected into office in 2015.
This will come at a “cost” though – Labour has to keep their promises of transferring powers to Scotland, following an election win, which by the way Salmond predicts will see a lot of SNP wins. The former first minister of Scotland is not interested in supporting the Tories, so perhaps it is time for Labour to get its act together and no longer remain lost linguistically, somewhere in between New Labour and Blairites.