The end of an era
It is a new era. As regular readers will know, I have been told to keep political commentary to a minimum on this site but as it feels like a turning point for me too maybe I can be excused one more time.
Despite my own personal political affiliations it is difficult not to be excited by the idea of coalition government. After all this had been Tony Blair’s plan if he had faced a much smaller majority in 1997 – rather negotiate with Liberal Democrats than be in hoc to Labour’s left wing.
My instinct is that either things will go wrong very quickly for the coalition or they will, as the ruling Parties hope, last a full Parliament. This will depend on events, personalities and, as I argued on Monday, the relationship between leaders who want to stay in power and MPs and activists who may find the compromises of office very uncomfortable.
In terms of our political culture an important question will be how the LibDems and Tories handle their differences. If they are willing to be reasonably frank about them and invite the public to engage in the debate, we really could see a more open and elevating type of politics. If, however, the debates are suppressed only to emerge in hostile press briefings, then the standing of our representative democracy could fall further still. The Osborne Cable pairing will be particularly fascinating in this regard. In many ways, it reminds me of the ill starred welfare reform partnership of Harriet Harman and Frank Field between 1997 and 1998 – let’s hope it does a great deal better.
As for me this is the time to hang up my boots as a pundit and occasional political advisor (out of working hours I hasten to add). It will be interesting to observe the Labour leadership contest and David Miliband will hope history repeats itself (in leadership elections the person who starts favourite for Labour usually wins while Tory favourites usually lose). The one bit of advice I would give to all the contenders is politely to distance themselves from the New Labour old guard, whether that is big beasts like Campbell and Mandelson or small fry like yours truly.
As for the RSA I believe we are entering a really exciting period. Our non-aligned political position is not only in keeping with our traditions but just right for the times. At our Trustees meeting yesterday we had excellent presentations on our Peterborough and Connected Communities projects. The RSA doesn’t just talk about the Big Society – we are doing the thinking and innovation that aims to make community renewal and deeper civic engagement real.
So it’s kind of poignant to look back across the whole cycle, starting with my first canvassing session – for Douglas Jay (who had himself been MP for Battersea North for over 30 years) in the 1979 election, through the 18 years of opposition and then the 13 years of Labour government and back out again. But one of the lessons of all that time has been that real enduring social change is as likely to start from outside Government as from the plans of politicians. I don’t know how the coalition government will do but I am certain the RSA is going to make a big impact in the years ahead.
No related posts.
Comments
8 Comments on The end of an era
-
Dipper on
Wed, 12th May 2010 7:21 pm
-
21st Century Trivium Man on
Wed, 12th May 2010 7:33 pm
-
Frances Zammit on
Thu, 13th May 2010 2:02 pm
-
JamieC on
Fri, 14th May 2010 11:02 am
-
Syzygy on
Fri, 14th May 2010 1:29 pm
-
Big Society(3): shape and size matter : RSA Projects on
Mon, 17th May 2010 3:35 pm
-
Not New Labour on
Tue, 18th May 2010 3:40 pm
-
Caitriona on
Tue, 18th May 2010 6:54 pm
Most premierships are defined by unexpected or unplanned events; the Falklands, Iraq, the credit crunch. The main threat to the coalition is one of these unexpected events. What happens if there’s an Islamist terrorist attack in the UK, and the Tories want blood whilst the LibDems want talks?
If they are all as quick and determined to undo the work of the last 13 years as Michael Gove then Government will be unrecognisable by next week. DCSF Rip. I have posted a few ‘quick’ blogs today tracking Gove’s moves:
http://21stcenturytriviumman.blogspot.com/
Education seems to be an area of common ground for the ConDems, there are a lot of good ideas, but so many of those working in the new government haven’t any real idea how to run state schools. I suppose that’s why they want us to start our own. Fancy starting a school anyone?
I thought all three main political parties missed a very special opportunity. Given the very interesting times in which we live – financial crisis (or financial rethink), grey dust from Icelandic Volcanoes, Oil oozing out over there, etc – what an opportunity it would have been for all three parties to show some real imagination and joined in a coalition of 3. The reason there are three main parties could perhaps be explained by saying they represent three main, and perfectly valid, interests in society: The Conservatives representing the land owning mind set, the Lib Dem’s related rather more to the laissez fair idea of commerce and economic life (although perhaps not so apparent in these times) and Labour, the idea that ordinary working people too (but not exclusively) have a legitimate interest and relevent point of view which needs to be taken into account when decisions are made on everyone’s behalf. What a wonderful example of the true Human Spirit it could have been ( and still could be) if the party leaders had each been man enough to tread such a path. As it is, they decided to stay in the ‘same old same old’ of opposition when the times call for something much greater.
The coalition is a fascinating development in British politics and demonstrates that one of the key arguments against proportional voting systems (that they result in weak coalitions) is true under FPTP as well. Sadly, however, the unique opportunity to push for real, radical change to the Westminster voting system has been lost. The Tories will never support PR – it would be suicidal to do so – and will actively campaign against AV, which in itself can be less fair than FPTP.
I think the coalition will last, partly because the Lib Dems cannot afford for it not to. They have created a huge backlash against themselves and need to remain within the confines of Government for as long as possible in order to create some positives to fight on. It is more likely, however, that they will find themselves carrying the can for the difficult decisions that are going to be made, with their claims to being the ‘progressive’ party dead and buried for a generation at least.
For Labour there appeared almost a relief to head to the opposition benches. The Government had started to look tired in office, with new ideas and energy in short supply. This period, particularly given the likely unpopularity of the administration once the cuts kick in, can allow the party to find some new direction, with the relatively successful scale of the defeat and the resurgence in local government providing a stronger base to build from.
So certainly interesting times in British politics, I think there may well be a continued need for your political thoughts in the years ahead. The RSA is rightly not a Party Political organisation, but is a political one – and now more than ever this is needed.
“Despite my own personal political affiliations it is difficult not to be excited by the idea of coalition government. After all this had been Tony Blair’s plan if he had faced a much smaller majority in 1997 – rather negotiate with Liberal Democrats than be in hoc to Labour’s left wing.”
As I understand this, you are justifying the misleading/betrayal of the respective electorates of the Tories and the LibDems by the fact that Tony Blair would have done the same in the same position! This is truly cynical. For Blair/Clegg/Cameron to want to marginalise people who do not share their ambitions is understandable, but they should have done so honestly. To take my vote as one of Labour’s left wing and then implement crypto-conservatism was anti-democratic in every way! I for one welcome your withdrawal as a political commentator associated with the LP… by all means say what you like but make it clear that you are not and have not spoken for Labour’s grass roots.
[...] an idea that, as Simon Jenkins and others have pointed out, may be perfectly sound in theory. As Mathew Taylor indicated, the RSA have been working to make society “bigger” for some time, and when [...]
And have you, Matthew, suddenly become irrelevant with the end of this era?
I don’t think Matthew has become irrelevant in the new era. On the contrary, in fact. I think his – the RSA’s ideas about society – will no longer be unfairly encumbered by association with specific political strategies, as some people have from time to time attempted to do. Now perhaps these ideas can be examined on their own merits. And I suspect that they might provide a helpful resource to anyone – of whatever political persuasion – who wants to think about how we can better live and work together.
Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
RSA Animate
RSA Mobile
RSA Comment- RSA Projects Blogs
- Twitter @RSAMatthew
- RSAMatthew: On my way to RSA Xmas party - I won't stay too long as it spoils the fun to have the boss around
- RSAMatthew: @DAaronovitch Reading Sennett more like an artistic than a intellectual exercise - best to skip over the bits that don't work for you
- RSAMatthew: @AdamYogaPilates No Bovril but kep warm by indignation at Fulham fans who arrive late, leave early and keep jumping up to get a snack !
RSA Bookshop
The RSA Bookshop, in partnership with Blackwell's the UK's leading academic bookseller, offers Fellows and friends an opportunity to purchase books and to explore our speakers’ ideas in greater detail. Visit the RSA Bookshop.