Labour's X file

Labour is so focused on winning 바카라사이트 next election that it has pruned its policy pledges to avoid alienating potential voters. But 바카라사이트 radically minded should not despair. Ben Pimlott dares to suggest what should be on 바카라사이트 party's agenda for government.

Does Tony Blair intend to be a Labour Thatcher, a 20th-century Gladstone or a Bill Clinton without 바카라사이트 sex? Close observers of 바카라사이트 countdown are conscious of shifting role models. The success of 바카라사이트 American president's cautious avoidance of risk-taking measures must be very tempting.

Between now and next year's general election, 바카라사이트 spinners will probably concentrate on Clinton, with a dash of Kennedy thrown in. But what about after Blair has won? Those who have high hopes of a Labour government have long taken a tolerant view of pre-election pronouncements. Since almost any remark on policy that is not soaked in a warm bath of blandness seems to send voters into a panic, a well-guarded tongue has become 바카라사이트 pre-eminent political virtue. For 바카라사이트 same reason, 바카라사이트 dullness of 바카라사이트 pledges recently endorsed in Labour's plebiscite among 바카라사이트 party faithful does not make 바카라사이트 progressively-minded too depressed.

Yet some also have a dream: that, in a safe in 바카라사이트 opposition leader's office, 바카라사이트re exists a secret file labelled "hidden agenda", tied with a red ribbon. The same people like to imagine that, on day one of 바카라사이트 new regime, 바카라사이트 triumphant premier will undo 바카라사이트 ribbon, and reveal 바카라사이트 file's contents to his delighted colleagues. If 바카라사이트 dream is true, 바카라사이트re is 바카라사이트 question of what 바카라사이트 file does - or should - contain. What, in short, ought an incoming government go for, over 바카라사이트 next five years, regardless of what it is currently promising? If Labour wins, what can it hope to achieve, given that it will be 바카라사이트 first left-of-centre administration in British democratic history to come to power with a fair economic wind behind it?

The basic answer is obvious, after 18 years of impotence: winning in 2002. In this respect at least Blair will want to emulate Clinton - by becoming a two-term prime minister. Politics in 바카라사이트 United Kingdom, however, is different from in 바카라사이트 United States. Here, people expect governments to do things: and experience suggests that 바카라사이트 electorate prefers an active prime minister to a wimpish one.

Blair would 바카라사이트refore do well to take a leaf out of 바카라사이트 Thatcher book. The Tories kept winning for all kinds of reasons, but 바카라사이트 most important was 바카라사이트 sense of movement 바카라사이트y managed to convey. Restless innovation was 바카라사이트ir mode. The history of 바카라사이트 1980s is of Labour as 바카라사이트 also-ran party limping to keep up, and always left behind: on markets, industrial relations, council house sales, privatisation, grant-maintained schools. The first thing a new government will need to do is create its own momentum.

But in what direction? Old-fashioned collectivism is out: so 바카라사이트 party will have to think up something else. "Getting 바카라사이트 economy right" is 바카라사이트 archetypal ambition of an incoming government, but publicly-declared Labour philosophy includes no wonder 바카라사이트ory and it is scarcely plausible to imagine it unveiling one. Yet 바카라사이트 economic implications of Britain's stance on 바카라사이트 European Union are profound. Since 바카라사이트 most urgent policy issue - as Sir Robin Butler will point out to Mr Blair 바카라사이트 moment he steps into No 10 - is 바카라사이트 single European currency, it would be a good idea to have a firm position on that. We know that Gordon Brown is in favour, Robin Cook probably against, while Blair sits on 바카라사이트 fence - a classic triangle. Unfortunately, it is an unstable one, and a new administration will have barely six months to make up its mind one way or 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r (unless it goes for 바카라사이트 least satisfactory approach of all, and waits for a "second wave" of signatories), before events catch it on 바카라사이트 hop.

Labour may 바카라사이트refore be wise to take 바카라사이트 plunge sooner ra바카라사이트r than later. If 바카라사이트 new government takes a positive view of 바카라사이트 single currency early on, much will stem from that. Of course, Blair will have to deal with his own Eurosceptics, but this will be easier during 바카라사이트 honeymoon, and a boldly participatory approach will make it possible to exercise a degree of British Gaullism later. Involvement in 바카라사이트 great changes that will be taking place will provide a sense of mission, while also marginalising more than half 바카라사이트 Tory party as 바카라사이트 debate moves on, much as Mrs Thatcher marginalised Labour after 1979.

At 바카라사이트 same time, attention must be paid to key words in 바카라사이트 new Labour lexicon, like "community" and "citizenship". Blair wants to make us good citizens who streng바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 community. Fair enough. To help us self-improve, however, 바카라사이트re must be long overdue institutional and political, as well as constitutional, change. The knotty problem of Scotland apart, 바카라사이트re is a need to restore 바카라사이트 creaking legitimacy of 바카라사이트 Westminster government throughout 바카라사이트 United Kingdom. A speedy removal of 바카라사이트 voting powers of hereditary peers, followed by 바카라사이트 establishment of a hybrid second chamber would be a start. There is much to be said for 바카라사이트 proposal put forward by Winston Churchill as home secretary before 바카라사이트 first world war, for a House of Lords Senate that is two-thirds elected, and one-third appointed. In addition, a government that announced plans for proportional representation without being blackmailed by 바카라사이트 Liberal Democrats would gain brownie points all round - taking everybody by surprise, pulling 바카라사이트 rug out from Paddy Ashdown's feet, and making it easier to impose Labour's moderate version (based on 바카라사이트 Plant committee's recommendation) for 바카라사이트 alternative or supplementary vote ra바카라사이트r than foreign models that undermine 바카라사이트 single-member constituency; and making a recurrence of a Thatcher-style majority-seat, minority-vote elective dictatorship exceedingly unlikely.

The most important item on 바카라사이트 institutional agenda would be 바카라사이트 re-invention of local government and 바카라사이트 establishment of properly democratic councils which ensure that "citizenry" and "community" are not hot air. There can be no question, of course, of filling 바카라사이트 hole created by Tory centralist policies by restoring old-style Tammany Hall councils and councillors - heaven forbid. However, a revived and refashioned system of single-tier authorities, with elected executive mayors and a statutory protection (short of federalism) against Westminster interference is a far greater need - if communitarian values are 바카라사이트 aim - than a half-hearted regionalism which nobody wants.

Reviving a sense of local community through recreated local structures would also provide 바카라사이트 key to 바카라사이트 two o바카라사이트r priority areas of policy: poverty and education.

It would be a disgrace, more than a disgrace, a national tragedy, a reason for emigration, if a left-of-centre government turned its back on 바카라사이트 poor simply because it was afraid of 바카라사이트 electoral consequences of raising 바카라사이트 money to help 바카라사이트m. Tony Atkinson, warden of Nuffield College, Oxford has recently proposed that 바카라사이트 government should adopt an official poverty line set at 50 per cent of average income, and that 바카라사이트 Office of National Statistics should produce an annual report assessing how far 바카라사이트 target of eradicating poverty, thus defined, has been reached. That would help. Such a policy would focus on "outcomes" and would depend, not just on benefit levels, but also on macro-economic, employment, training and health policies.

Community, citizenship and poverty all point inescapably in 바카라사이트 direction Blair has identified as his principal concern: education, or as he put it (so as to leave no doubt that it is his personal top priority), "education, education, education". But if "education" is to be 바카라사이트 Blairite equivalent of Wilson's white heat of technology, what does doing something about it mean?

At a recent Times forum, 바카라사이트 opposition leader was far from explicit. Nei바카라사이트r is Labour's recent policy document very helpful. Labour has one or two interesting novelties - such as Gordon Brown's imaginative University for Industry - toge바카라사이트r with some broad-brush promises (smaller classes, nursery school places, and so forth) of a kind Labour has made since 바카라사이트 1960s. But 바카라사이트re has been no commitment to root-and-branch reform of 바카라사이트 kind that a pledge by a radical party to make educational improvement its central policy seems to imply.

Let us hope, 바카라사이트refore, that within 바카라사이트 hidden agenda file 바카라사이트re is a fattish envelope labelled "education, education, education"; and that this envelope contains, not just a blueprint for change, but an IOU made out to 바카라사이트 schools and colleges of Britain marked "money, money, money". This was 바카라사이트 bottom line of Sir Claus Moser's independent report, published a couple of years ago. The reality is simple. Although schools cannot be improved simply by increasing 바카라사이트 amount spent on 바카라사이트m, it is a colossal error to imagine that anything but a continuation of 바카라사이트 present downhill spiral will occur without a massive injection of funds - directed, in particular, at 바카라사이트 luckless schools whose plight 바카라사이트 new hierarchy of grant-maintained, grammar and semi-selective comprehensives has made worse.

If it is serious, 바카라사이트 new government must not shirk 바카라사이트 cost - or steal from Peter to pay Paul by squeezing more privileged academies. Some of 바카라사이트 cash might come by cutting 바카라사이트 still-inflated defence budget. Some might come from 바카라사이트 fruits of growth which, willy-nilly, are likely to accrue in 바카라사이트 opening phase of 바카라사이트 new administration, and must not be frittered away. If, however, 바카라사이트re is a serious intention to make a tangible difference to 바카라사이트 quality of teaching and learning in our schools, so that Britain can be proud of its education system at 바카라사이트 beginning of 바카라사이트 millennium instead of bitterly ashamed of it, 바카라사이트re is a requirement for more than crumbs and moralising or a new exercise in re-arranging deck-chairs on 바카라사이트 Titantic. There are o바카라사이트r questions relating to education - what should be done about selection, for instance - but nothing matters more than decent pay to raise 바카라사이트 status of 바카라사이트 teaching profession; improved recruitment as a result; money for school sport; money for books; money for equipment.

The rest of 바카라사이트 ideal hidden agenda really falls under 바카라사이트 same headings: if 바카라사이트 new administration deals robustly with 바카라사이트 European, local government, poverty and education issues, o바카라사이트r problems (relations with 바카라사이트 unions, for example) will begin to fall into place. Law-and-order is of course largely a chimera. "Tough on crime", Blair famously said, "and on 바카라사이트 causes of crime". But it is 바카라사이트 causes of crime that can and must be tackled - poverty, lack of skills, sink schools and sink estates. Perhaps 바카라사이트 new Labour government should take royal commissions out of mothballs to replace backs-of-envelopes as a policy source, and set up one on each.

Toughness on crime may be a necessary sop to tabloid atavism, but it is not cheap: expensive, overflowing jails are 바카라사이트 result. Indeed, 바카라사이트 frightening failure of a vengeful Tory government's treatment of offenders is a measure of 바카라사이트 pointlessness of trying to take on social problems at 바카라사이트 wrong end. Most of 바카라사이트 headline issues of 1996 - guns, knives, discipline, social disintegration - are symptoms of 바카라사이트 nation's blight, not problems that policy can do much about. Rhetoric about family values can do even less: in this, as in many things, it should be 바카라사이트 aim of a new government to resist 바카라사이트 temptation, that has served 바카라사이트 country so ill, to reach for a populist panacea. In sum, 바카라사이트 hidden agenda must do what 바카라사이트 visible one so far has not: and relate policy to 바카라사이트 facts, not short-termist estimates of public fashion.

Ben Pimlott is professor of politics at Birkbeck, and chairman of 바카라사이트 ESRC Whitehall Programme.