Two recent politic stories highlight just how rapidly remaining differences between the only two political parties in Britain capable of forming governments continue to erode. That can only be to the detriment of voter choice.
First off, we read that the Smith Institute - a thinktank linked with Gordon Brown - and the Centre for Social Justice - a thinktank linked with Iain Duncan Smith - are to publish a joint strategy on how to get children out of poverty.
As Guardian reporter Andrew Wintour notes, accurately enough: The joint initiative suggests the differences between the two parties are much smaller than they pretend.
Indeed, the whole exercise is being dressed up as an attempt to ‘take the issue out of party politics’. This, we are supposed to believe, cannot be other than a Good Thing. But is this necessarily the case?
Obviously one must await publication of the report before offering any assessment. But it seems inconceivable that it will come up with proposals that represent anything other than further ideological capitulation by Labour to centre-right ideas.
After all, it is not as if the Tories – who throughout their history have upheld but one unrelenting purpose, namely to represent the minority of wealthy people that control society - have become converted to anything even vaguely resembling social democracy.
Of course it is legitimate to argue about the relative merits of different anti-poverty approaches. But in acting in this cartel like manner, Labour and the Conservatives surely merit reference to the Office of Fair Trading. What they are doing is closing down the debate before it can evan be had.
Meanwhile, Ken Livingstone has promised that he will offer Boris Johnson a job in a Labour administration if he wins the London mayor election on Thursday, and will virtually train up his Conservative opponent for a second shot in 2012:
Certainly if I get elected this time, I will phone people up and say "I want you to come in and do this [job] for the benefit of London". If Boris doesn't win, I am not certain Cameron is ever going to put him in one of the great offices of state, so I suspect he will be back for another go. He would be a better mayor [for having worked in the administration].
I think Boris is a person of huge potential, but he's never been involved in detailed administration of anything. I would genuinely want Boris to come in, take a job and get some experience.
This, after building an entire campaign on painting Johnson as a rather nasty racist. I’m confused, Ken … who do I vote for if I want to see Johnson clear off back to Henley where he belongs, rather than sitting behind a desk at City Hall? Not you, it seems.
Gestures like this can only feed public cynicism, enhancing suspicions that the political class is a narrow clique that looks after its own through an all-inclusive popular front. Win or lose, Boris wins.
Such practices ape some of the worst aspects of US municipal politics. I’m still occasionally in touch with an old college buddy who is a leftwing Democrat with big time political ambitions.
He holds an important job in a major American city, which he got more or less as an explicit trade-off for withdrawing from a run for Congress and throwing the Irish vote behind the mayor’s preferred candidate. But at least that was a Democrat-Democrat in house transaction.
Livingstone’s enthusiasm for non-Labour forces has driven him to agreeing a vote transfer pact with the Greens and making remarks just short of a de facto endorsement of George Galloway’s bid for an assembly seat at the head of the Respect Renewal list:
I would like to think we could work together and [Galloway would] form part of a broad coalition with the Greens and us against the Tories and Islamophobes,
It looks like Livingstone is running his own mini version of the Big Tent strategy that has not worked particularly well for Brown.
Ironically, this is the man who once wrote a book with the title ‘If Voting Changed Anything, They’d Abolish it’. It’s a shame to see him provide further confirmation.
Posted at 14:26, 28 April 2008
Comments (10)
Don't forget that Gordan Brown gave Digby Jones a job in his government. Also, it was a Labour Government that enobled him. No, Dave, you're living in the past, I'm afraid. It's a brave, new world out there.
I think you have this wring dave.
It was a joke at JOhnson's expense, where Livingstone was mocking Boris Johnson's lack of real experience by offering to give him a job; thus emphasising the gapp between them where he could patronise JOhnson.
It doesn't mean Livingstone woulsd really offer Boris Johnsin a job, nor of course would Johnson want one.
I have no idea what the hell Ken thinks he's doing. His own supporters are not likely to be impressed by these remarks, and Boris supporters like myself think he is trying to appear as Mr Nice Guy just before the election having insulted Boris at every opportunity for the last two months!
"Ken Livingstone yesterday offered to give his Tory rival a job and train him as a future mayoral candidate, in an extraordinary last-minute bid for Tory votes.
After weeks of dismissing Boris Johnson as a lightweight celebrity, Livingstone conceded he would try to employ his opponent if he were re-elected and even hinted that he could put Johnson in pole position for the 2012 elections."
Thos is how the article starts and no where later on does it sound like a joke. If it was meant as one its very open to be interpreted as serious , so if a joke not very clever .
Not good tactics .
Focusing on one aspect of all this:
Livinsgtone really is a fool, isn't he? Standing up for Galloway is certainly big-tent politic. Of a kind. He's siddling up to the chap who's pissing outside and inviting to have a slash within.
Mind you the pair of them are already matched for their inability to devise an anti-racist strategy in place of reactionary multi-culturalism.
Livinsgtone and Galloway's campaigns against 'Islamophobia' have played a substantial (not exclusive obviously) part in communalising London politics. Their thrust is not anti-racist, but the opposite: to make people more and more aware of their religous-ethnic identity and to mangle any class and popular unity.
I would say that the BNP's sudden discovery of the merits of Christianity is due to them realising that they too can play this game. Te likes of Galloway and his chums in the Jamaat-i-Islami et.al, not to mention Livingstone's alliance with the Muslim Initiative and a host of more reactionary Islamists and racists, fuel this reaction, and do not combat it. As does the Christian People's Alliance (and whatever the other bit of its name is). And I would bet that groups excluded from this particular play-off, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Budhists, not to mention the very large number of atheists and agonistics, are heartily sick of the polarisation and self-importance of the Christians and Islamists.
Once you start on this road of building your political base on religious communities you are lost to progressive politics.
Livingstone certainly offered Norris a job but he didn't take it up. I don't for a minute expect that there is any substance in this. The only other party Ken has worked well with have been The Greens who it could be argued are to the left of Labour anyway.
Seeing as the CSJ(another decent term appropriated by the right) sees only the third sector as the solution to such issues as well as personal failing and basically rejects welfare state solutions, as Dave says what does that say about the nature of politics in the UK.Then again NL have brought in the draconian welfare reform act and the Freud US style privatisations of welfare, so itstough times ahead for the poor all round,
Welcome to the 51st state!
btw, this isn't a yet another thread about Galloway, livingstone, etc, you have SU for that, its about the tweedle dum and tweedle dee politics we have now,
will it change, can it change?
In a similar vein Kate hoey has said she will be an advisor to Johnson if he wins.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-mp-would-advise-johnson-on-sport-817470.html
as for the Johnson job offer it probably has more to do with winning over a few wavering Tories, making the point about Johnson's lack of experience and Ken wanting to be seen as magnanimous
after all little Boris is not going to take it either way, and Ken's factored that into his political calculations
as for Kate Hoey, her slid, nay, bolt to the right is amazing, I seem to remember her as a fresh face vigorous IMGer
how times have changed? or maybe not?
must be that Fox hunting tendency showing its true blue colours? talk about deep, deep entryism
the London election is a bit of a shindig for the political classes, and no wonder most Londoners are turned off by the whole matter