If Peter Hain is right, then Lib Dem will be my party of choice for the next general election:
But the central electoral dilemma for the Liberal Democrats is that although their appeal has traditionally been a progressive one, overwhelmingly their target seats are held by the Conservatives. Any hope of advance therefore depends on winning over disillusioned Tories.Hain claims that the Lib Dems argue against ID cards "on grounds of cost rather than civil liberties", would scrap the New Deal and maintain the minimum wage at £4.85, promises £25bn spending cuts, increase competition within the NHS, and much more. All very sensible, social market reforms that New Labour should aspire to! Thanks to Hain, I will now pay more attention to what the Lib Dems have to say!The party has therefore adopted a magpie approach. Progressive measures are bundled ill-fittingly with rightwing measures that neglect the interests of hard-working people.
The 'Orange Book' that's being touted around this week's Lib Dem conference is part of a fascinating trend for the party to reclaim the 'liberal' economics of its 19th Century heritage. In other words, good old free market, free trade laissez faire. This never went away, of course, it just lay laregely dormant until 1979 when Margaret Thatcher thought that the best way forward for Britain was to return to the economic hegemony of the Victorians (you know, the monetary system which unleashed the unstoppable jugganaut of capitalism, drove a massive and devisive wedge between the super-rich and the massive new urban proleteriat poor and led to the pressure cooker of international competetiveness in productivity which eventually expressed itself through military means in the First World War). Once the Tories had stolen the Liberal's clothes, Tony Blair's Labour carried on the trend, realising that the middle class liked getting richer at the expense of the underclass (funny that). So, let the Liberal Democrats reclaim the econmic policies which are theirs by right, especially if it means they can take some seats off the Conservatives. However, I wish the 'young turks' of the party who are leading this brave and radical revolution wouldn't call it 'New Liberalism', for the following reasons:
1. It's not new, as I've just explained
2. The label 'New Liberalism' is already taken by a faction within the 1906 Liberal government (including Winston Churchill) which turned away from the cut-throat capitalism of the 19th Century and introduced the first ever state provision for pensions and unemployment benefit. In other words, precisely the opposite of the market based reforms the modern Lib Dems are proposing. Take a look here for more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/16/sosteacher/history/49718.shtml
Posted by: Matthew Whitfield | September 22, 2004 at 12:44 PM