-
But I did know that Blair and Brown were going to turn on the spending taps
This is nonsense. In 1997 Gordon Brown made a very well publicised pledge to stick precisely to existing Conservative spending plans for at least 2 years, alongside promising no tax rises. It was to head off the exact same public concerns about Labour that Starmer is worried about now.
lemonade-
I may not have known
Mate, he's talking about his recollection of how he saw the New Labour brand at the time. Not denying that certain policies ever existed.
-
This is nonsense. In 1997 Gordon Brown made a very well publicised pledge to stick precisely to existing Conservative spending plans for at least 2 years, alongside promising no tax rises. It was to head off the exact same public concerns about Labour that Starmer is worried about now.
There's the carnival bark and then there's the show. Labour ran with two competing narratives in that election - you're right that there was the 'you can trust us with the economy' narrative, which they sent (frankly) down the media pipes I wasn't aware of at the time, being an 18 year old lad with spunk in my eye and a song in my heart, who would rather get a sensible haircut than listen to the Today programme.
But there was also the 'things can only get better' narrative of optimism. Starmer doesn't need to copy that narrative - there's not much grounds for optimism right now - but he IS lacking an emotional direction of travel to allow me to contextualise the promises they make, to understand the basis on which they'll make their decisions. I'd even argue that for new Labour this strategic narrative was more prominent than the one you're referring to. They even put in their manifesto - the windfall levy on privatised utilities to fund work schemes, the promise to cut class sizes, the promise to cut NHS waiting lists. I knew less about politics then than I knew now but what that meant for my life was clear to me even at the time - Blair believed in hard work and reward but also fairness and reducing inequality.
I think the distinction between these two approaches is summarised by the distinction between Blair and Brown fwiw - Brown definitely wanted to push the iron chancellor image. Blair didn't. And Blair was who I was paying attention to.
I am a Labour man. I'm a treasurer for my local party, been a member for ages, and I'm a delegate. I'll be door knocking for Starmer. I'm in no way not going to vote for Labour. But I also see our weaknesses, and I don't think it harms us by discussing them.
hugo7
ReekBlefs
This is what we used to call strategy. I may not have known in 1997 that - for example - Labour were going to make the bank of england independent of government in their first week, or start the beginning of the end of the Troubles. There was nothing about it in their manifesto.
But I did know that Blair and Brown were going to turn on the spending taps. I knew they'd have an interventionist stance on domestic policy. I knew they were promising change. I knew they were internationalist and pro business and pro meritocracy.
That's what's missing here. It's not policy. It's not even principle. It's narrative.