-
Here’s a quote from Harold Wilson in 1970 about Conservative policy:
What they are planning is a wanton, calculated and deliberate return to greater inequality. The new Tory slogan is: back to the free for all. A free for all in place of the welfare state. A free for all market in labour, in housing, in the social services. They seek to replace the compassionate society with the ruthless, pushing society. The message to the British people would be simple. And brutal. It would say: ‘You’re out on your own.’
I’m not fully aware of what he enacted in power, but his rhetoric is the kind of deep cynicism of the neoliberal order that could honestly have been written yesterday with equal importance. Blair had his ideas too, but I don’t think they’re comparable to real social democratic values like this.
Domestically, Blair managed some decent things like the minimum wage and reform to the House of Lords, but his ideology was far from welfare expansionism — like Starmer, it’s a question of how to make some relatively small legal and procedural tweaks within a capitalist framework, rather than tackling neoliberalism head on.
That, alongside his pro-market reforms (BoE independence, foundation hospitals and academies), I don’t think you can dismiss his neoliberal tendencies.
slippers-
I find this discussion really interesting - I'd not have thought Blair was what people mean by neoliberal (and it seems I'm not alone in that) but there are obviously lots of people who do think that's a fair description. I'd agree he doesn't reject capitalism but if he's neoliberal, how broadly is that really defined? Which countries could really be said not to be neoliberal by that definition?
-
... his pro-market reforms
BoE independence
Doesn't reduce the size of the state, it just puts a chunk under technocratic rather than political control.
It was popular with markets because it reduced the risk of politicians fiddling with interest rates capriciously. It wasn't abolished or privatised.
Foundation hospitals
Still part of the NHS, still not reducing the size of the state. The inspiration was allegedly a hospital in Spain which is partly governed by trade unions and community groups, which sounds like the least neoliberal thing imaginable.
academies
Are still state-funded, just outside local government control. Again, not reducing the size of the state. Arguably expanding it slightly.
don’t think you can dismiss his neoliberal tendencies
Mostly these are examples of a turf war with local government. None of them reduced the size of the state, or privatised anything, or replaced any state activity with free markets.
They did have other pro-market policies, I just don't think these are good examples, and certainly not enough to justify calling them "neoliberal".
andyfallsoff
useless
I wasn't clear on this so I'll take it on the chin but I meant anyone now under 80 would not have seen those kinds of reforms. Basically unless you were alive in 1946 for the Attlee NHS building, the next best thing you'd have seen was Blair in 1997 for expanding and strengthening the welfare state.
I think a lot of people - not you - use the word 'neoliberal' to mean 'things I don't like'.