How 'new' In The History Of The Labour Party Is New Labour?

The rise of Tony Blair as leader of the Labour party in 1994 and the actions of Labour in government after 1997 have led political scientists and historians alike to argue that New Labour presented a significant break from the party's past. But whilst much focus on the 'newness' of New Labour between 1997 and 2010 has been on the ideological shift away from Clause IV towards Blair's 'Third Way' and the centre left, it is clear that the policies of the party in government reveal that determining the differences and similarities between Labour today and earlier in the 20th century is more complex. 'Old' Labour values, or those fundamental to the party, can be seen as those of their social democratic core: a belief in economic and social equality through redistribution and a suspicion of capitalist free market systems, support for strong public services based on government and collective action, and the creation of a 'social' society based on fellowship rather than mutual self-interest . By comparing these to New Labour's economic approach, their reforms to the welfare and education system, as well as policies on crime and justice, it is clear that whilst Labour did reinterpret and redirect much of the party's approach to governing, some of the older principles of the party remained in place. Taking into consideration the factor of leadership dynamics between Blair and Brown in determining policy-making and the circumstances of governing alongside these areas, it seems New Labour is different to the party's past, but not as totally 'new' as it has been argued.

Whilst New Labour's economic approach signalled a significant shift towards political enthusiasm for the private sector and free markets as well as the reduction of state activity, it is clear that the importance of the public sector well as social equality, to some extent, have not been rejected. Certainly, the removal of 1918's Clause IV and its promise of equal redistribution for workers on 'the basis of common ownership' signalled an acceptance of neo-liberal economics and a move away from the Keynesian approach of the 1960s and 70s. Under Brown's Chancellorship, the promise of 'fiscal caution' (with the Golden Rule, for example) went alongside the continuation of some Conservative policy decisions. Indeed, the promise to stick to Conservative spending plans for the first two years after 1997 and the independence of the Bank of England to more effectively manage monetary policy signalled a belief in reduced state economic activity; a policy compounded by the relatively low rate of inflation - 2%, the lowest in 100 years. Furthermore, a real reluctance to increase taxation in the first term and a focus on competitiveness through flexible work contracts and deregulation rather than managing employment through wage policy was markedly different from the disasters of 1979 and Callaghan's struggle during the 'Winter of Discontent' and the politics of trade union associations and demand-side inflation. The association with industry and the working class as well as a commitment to active government involvement in markets seemed to diminish even further after 1997 , marking a completely different pattern in comparison to previous Labour governments.

But whilst free markets and the private sector, it seemed, were embraced with much enthusiasm, awareness of social inequality and of the importance of the public good closely associated with the traditional values of Labour did remain in place. It is clear that Blair and Brown reinterpreted this through a different, neo-liberal economic model, but 'equality of opportunity' and the promises of the New Deal sought to balance macroeconomic aims with more traditional Labour concerns . The introduction of the National Minimum Wage and the 'Train to Gain' scheme launched in 2006 sought to reduce unemployment and create a skilled Labour market at the same time. Brown's Working Tax and Child Credits for all families (reaching an estimated 20 million in 2005) combined with new approaches to social deprivation and poverty: programs like Sure Start and a focused target on pensioners, carers and the disabled meant poverty for over-65s came down by 25%. Although the Blair government has been more closely linked with the wealthy, with corporate tax counting for only 2.1% of national income in 2005 and income tax on the wealthy at the lowest point since 1945 (until 2008) , and it could not deliver promises on child poverty, for example, a keen focus on equality of opportunity and 'safety-net welfare' saw the role out of extensive programs linked closely with 'social justice.' Equality of opportunity was different to the equality of outcome promised by the Labour of old, but New Labour still placed an awareness of the states position as a guarantor of welfare as well as the promise of better living conditions for all the core of socio-economic policy.

This argument can be extended more specifically to the welfare state and public services, including the NHS and Education policy. Whilst the introduction of marketisation, government targets and an attempt to encourage better provision through the specialisation of schools and new vocational subjects indicated that the comprehensive Welfare system as it stood was being further dismantled to encourage private rather than collective action by individuals, a focus on better public services as well as equality of opportunity still remained important to New Labour. Indeed, it is clear that the creation of Primary Care Trusts with significant budgetary powers and Foundation Hospitals with incentives to meet targets and improve conditions in order to gain status sought to both devolve power to bodies within the NHS as well as create an internal market that would tackle inefficiencies like waiting lists and poor working conditions. Furthermore, the continuation of the Private Finance Initiative under Brown signalled an acceptance of the private sector's role in building and maintaining better hospitals and schools whilst offsetting short-term fiscal pressures . In terms of education the 2006 Education Act and specialist schools focused on both vocational and technical training to encourage a more skilled Labour Market. Coupled with the introduction of Tuition Fees in 1998 and the increased cost of dentistry and optometry, it seemed New Labour, compared to Labour governments before it, sought to roll back the boundaries of Welfare and the public sector.

However, although Blair's 'Third Way' seemed like a rejection of the public sector as the best way of securing the common good, much of New Labour's reform continued to reinforce equality of opportunity and did seek to rebuild and emphasize the importance of a world-class welfare system (even if it did not fully succeed), once again through a reinterpretation of traditional values. After 2001, investment in the NHS and in education increased substantially, and funding reached nearly 10% of total national wealth by 2007. Furthermore, over 193 000 extra staff were recruited by 2005, and over ¾ of children in Primary School Education left with the appropriate levels of Maths and English in 2006, compared to only a third in 1997. Indeed, Brown's budget in 2002 built upon the promise to 'save the NHS' and match EU levels of welfare spending', a promise that was distinctly social democratic, if costly, leading to a National Insurance rise . Furthermore, whilst the rejection of the comprehensive school and the increasing power of Local Authorities suggested a change within Labour itself towards greater enthusiasm for the independent school or public school system, significant work was done to target the poorest children and to provide an even opportunity base. City Academies and attempts to introduce soft subjects, although controversial, meant to allow students from failing institutions and with less academic potential to succeed despite adverse conditions. Whilst many parts of the benefits system became means-tested, new grants and allowances for students, for example, focused on tackling social exclusion and allowing equal opportunity. Although New Labour's ability to balance differentials in wealth and status with improved social opportunity and mobility is questionable, it did seek to address values at Labour's traditional core -equality in some sense, and a more dynamic, well-provisioned public sector as a solution to social problems- through a different economic approach and policy that they believed to be practical.

Whilst Welfare system reform under New Labour indicated a partial rejection of old party values in favour of a new, decentralised and competitive system, Blair's policies on Crime and Justice seem to indicate a sharper de-alignment between the party's past and its actions in office between 1997. However, hard-line policies and more traditional Labour approaches were introduced too, suggesting that 'being tough on crime' went hand in hand with attempts to change the cultural and socio-economic background that was associated with it. Clearly, Blair accepted hard-line approaches above 'soft' policies (including rehabilitation) as a way to tackle criminal offenders . A rapid increase in prison numbers to over 83 000 in 2010, as well as greater police numbers and more extensive search powers (as assigned by the Crime and Protection Act in 2001 and the Terrorism Act of 2005) were measures that were both continuations of Conservative policies and new view of individual accountability over collective social responsibility The Anti-Social Behaviour Act of 1999, for example introduced ASBO's to directly tackle young offenders by the threat of limited future opportunities, and the use of custodial sentencing and longer sentencing for repeat offenders (citing a 90% success rate for third time perpetrators) was also implemented. With the aftermath of September 11th and the extensive central power outlined by Labour in lieu of a new terrorist threat, it seemed clear that New Labour was taking a more right wing, publicly popular view of crime that meant to create immediate results.

However, as with Welfare and economic policies, hardline criminal justice measures were combined with attempts -even if limited- to tackle its roots in inequality and deprivation, a view that was associated with the core of Labour's traditional social democratic approach . Building on the 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, for example, community programmes like 'Respect' and rehabilitation centres were set up from 2002, and the acknowledgement that child poverty and education were underlying factors meant that 40 000 young offenders were placed in training and employment after 1999. Whilst Labour's claim in office that non-violent crime fell by 49% between 1995 and 2010 is questionable given the relative adjustments to the British Crime Survey's measurements as well as the impact of policing targets in tackling specific crimes like burglary , PAC and community action schemes seeking to educate children about drugs and alcohol as well engage more communities in self-monitoring was an approach underpinned traditional Labour principles. As well as greater vigilance and a harder crackdown, the involvement of poorer communities in collectively addressing the causes of crime through collective action was a reinterpretation based on the principle of social justice through practice more closely associated with right-wing politics. Once more, New Labour attempted to reinterpret its traditional goals and adapt them to existing policies and contemporary circumstances, selectively building upon past Labour principles rather than rejecting them completely.

As well as an examination of New Labour's policy record, it is also important to consider the dynamics of Labour leadership and the circumstances of government in determining real differences between New and 'Old' Labour. It is clear that the difficult relationship between Blair and Brown certainly altered the direction of policy as well as decision-making in government. Whilst both shared a common belief in New Labours basic principles: the modernisation of the party, an acceptance of neo-liberal economics and the pragmatism of the 'Third Way' in providing an alternate path between both socialist and Conservative policy, Blair's strategic caution contrasted against Brown's bolder economic planning. Although it was clear, for example, that greater funding for public services in 2001 was a promise explicitly made by Blair, no previous consultation with the Treasury left Brown searching for fiscal support without over taxation. Pressures from the Prime Minister to continue with 'stealth' taxes rather National Insurance rises contrasted against Brown's desire to do so, and the difficulties of miscommunication and tension between both camps (with Browns desire for Blair's political power) meant 2002 budget report promises were never met.

Blair's keenness to introduce marketisation and private sector involvement contrasted against Brown's awareness of the complexities of reform along those, and the result was the development of a partial internal market, the result of a compromised push-and-pull between both camps. The fact that under Brown's leadership from 2008 responses to the economic crisis came in the form of Keynesian quantitative easing and part-nationalisation of the banking system, policies closely associated with Labour's past, suggested the differences between the two key leaders of New Labour: whilst governments were pragmatic in office in order to adapt promises into policy, the differences between Blair's centrist decision-making and Brown's more traditional centre-left thinking often meant a compromised, if unclear outcome balanced between two sides. The 'break with past' it can be argued, was made less substantial because of this dynamic, as the reinterpretation of older social democratic principles and their practical application in policies was emphasised by a leadership seeking compromise between two camps.

In conclusion, it seems that although New Labour seemed substantially different from the politics of past Labour governments, it is difficult to argue that the government abandoned traditional social democratic principles entirely during its term in power. Whilst a neo-liberal economic approach and the core acceptance of free markets in providing the most efficient solution underpinned socio-economic policy, it was clear that this was coupled with a redevelopment of older views on equality and collective responsibility. Equality of opportunity rather than outcome and a belief in a stronger rather than comprehensive public sector was central to welfare reform, although many attempts to address these issues came in the form of traditionally 'centre-right' than left policies. Furthermore, whilst education saw specialisation for skilled Labour Markets and less animosity towards the public school and 11 plus examination system, genuine efforts were made to tackle social justice in the form of child poverty, solutions for failing schools in deprived areas as well as education targets. Attempts to address crime too, came in the form of some softer measures that sought to rehabilitate rather than punishment. Coupled with the significance of a difficult power-balance between Blair and Brown in developing compromised, practical solutions rather than fully coherent policies, it is clear although their results may not have been positive, New Labour was not fully 'New' in comparison to the Labour party in previous terms of office. To some extent, New Labour built on the principles of the past in order to bring them into the present circumstances, reinterpreting old views rather than rejecting all of them entirely.

Bibliography

Cerny, P. G., and M. Evans. "Globalisation and Public Policy under New Labour." Policy Studies 25, no. 1 (2004): 51-646.

Glyn, A., and S. Wood. "New Labour`s Economic Policy." In Social Democracy in Neo-Liberal Times. Oxford University Press, 2001.

Hay, C. The Political Economy of New Labour. Manchester University Press, 1999.

Heath, A., R. Jowel, and J. Curtice. The Rise of New Labour. Oxford University Press, 2001.

Kim, Dr. Bo-Yung. "Reviewing Old Labour: the Wilson and the Callaghan Government." Buyong. 2010 http://www.boyung.net/docs/Ideology_and_policy_development_c2_reviewing%20Old%20Labour.pdf (accessed 2012).

Richards, S. Whatever It Takes. Fourth Estate, 2010.

Shaw, E. Losing Labour`s Soul? Routledge, 2008.

White, S. New Labour: the Progressive Future? Palgrave MacMillan, 2001.